Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 24, 2023. It is now read-only.

Add fees with fee burning #99

Merged
merged 16 commits into from
Dec 14, 2020
Merged

Add fees with fee burning #99

merged 16 commits into from
Dec 14, 2020

Conversation

adlerjohn
Copy link
Member

@adlerjohn adlerjohn commented Dec 2, 2020 •
edited
Loading

See the rationale document for rationale: https://github.com/lazyledger/lazyledger-specs/blob/adlerjohn-fees/rationale/fees.md

Add consensus rules and data structures for paying fees.

@adlerjohn adlerjohn added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request consensus labels Dec 2, 2020
@adlerjohn adlerjohn added this to the Pre-implementation draft milestone Dec 2, 2020
@adlerjohn adlerjohn self-assigned this Dec 2, 2020
@adlerjohn adlerjohn linked an issue Dec 2, 2020 that may be closed by this pull request
Handle fees #96
Closed
@adlerjohn adlerjohn marked this pull request as ready for review December 2, 2020 14:27
@adlerjohn adlerjohn requested review from liamsi and musalbas December 2, 2020 14:28
liamsi
liamsi reviewed Dec 8, 2020
View reviewed changes
specs/consensus.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@adlerjohn @liamsi
Update specs/consensus.md
5d0c3f8 
Co-authored-by: Ismail Khoffi <[email protected]>
liamsi
liamsi reviewed Dec 8, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@liamsi liamsi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I didn't fully familiarize myself with eip-1559 but the changes make sense. Also, I didn't yet validate each check and each state transition. The ones I've checked make sense so far and besides some minor comments the PR looks good to me.

@adlerjohn adlerjohn requested a review from liamsi December 9, 2020 00:00
liamsi
liamsi approved these changes Dec 14, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@liamsi liamsi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! I think we'll give this a second and much more detailed pass, when triying to implement this (e.g. as a cosmos module - this discussion is kinda related btw: cosmos/cosmos-sdk#7347)

@adlerjohn adlerjohn merged commit b194a12 into master Dec 14, 2020
@adlerjohn adlerjohn deleted the adlerjohn-fees branch December 14, 2020 15:15
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Reviewers

@liamsi liamsi liamsi approved these changes

@musalbas musalbas Awaiting requested review from musalbas

Assignees

@adlerjohn adlerjohn

Labels
consensus documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Pre-implementation draft
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Handle fees
2 participants
@adlerjohn @liamsi