-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CCIP-020: Graceful Protocol Shutdown #68
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #68 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 88.86% 88.89% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 21 22 +1
Lines 1356 1468 +112
Branches 206 231 +25
==========================================
+ Hits 1205 1305 +100
- Misses 137 148 +11
- Partials 14 15 +1
... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
This simplifies the contract per CCIP-020 to only address the shutdown of mining/stacking.
There are still a few more tests to add now that we're tracking votes per city, but the ratio in is-executable feels off here. Will post back to Discord for consensus.
Reminder: contract names have a length limit in older versions of Clarinet. It passed check but failed with a readonly() function error in test suite.
The expected balance is hardcoded and changed with a test proposal that required funding from the deployer account.
Technical preparations for voting are being finalized, right? |
Part of citycoins/governance#30
Redemption contracts need to be deployed first.CCIP-020 proposal will disable mining/stacking in the protocol, more info in this comment.