fix: allow for execution of proposals that have closed overrule propo…

…sal (same as rejected)

contracts/subdaos/cwd-subdao-timelock-single/src/contract.rs

@@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ pub fn execute_execute_proposal(
         });
     }
 
-    if !is_overrule_proposal_rejected(&deps, &env, &config.overrule_pre_propose, proposal.id)? {
+    if !is_overrule_proposal_denied(&deps, &env, &config.overrule_pre_propose, proposal.id)? {
         return Err(ContractError::TimeLocked {});
     }
 
@@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ pub fn migrate(deps: DepsMut, _env: Env, _msg: MigrateMsg) -> Result<Response, C
     Ok(Response::default())
 }
 
-fn is_overrule_proposal_rejected(
+fn is_overrule_proposal_denied(
     deps: &DepsMut,
     env: &Env,
     overrule_pre_propose: &Addr,
@@ -363,7 +363,8 @@ fn is_overrule_proposal_rejected(
             proposal_id: overrule_proposal_id,
         },
     )?;
-    Ok(overrule_proposal.proposal.status == Status::Rejected)
+    Ok(overrule_proposal.proposal.status == Status::Rejected
+        || overrule_proposal.proposal.status == Status::Closed)
 }
 
 #[cfg_attr(not(feature = "library"), entry_point)]

contracts/subdaos/cwd-subdao-timelock-single/src/testing/tests.rs

@@ -270,6 +270,40 @@ fn test_execute_proposal() {
     let updated_prop = PROPOSALS.load(deps.as_mut().storage, 10).unwrap();
     assert_eq!(ProposalStatus::Executed, updated_prop.status);
 
+    // check execution with close_proposal_on_execution_failure = true and overrule proposal Status == Closed
+    deps.querier.set_close_proposal_on_execution_failure(true);
+    let proposal = SingleChoiceProposal {
+        id: 11,
+        msgs: vec![correct_proposal_msg()],
+        status: ProposalStatus::Timelocked,
+    };
+    PROPOSALS
+        .save(deps.as_mut().storage, proposal.id, &proposal)
+        .unwrap();
+    // if overrule has Status::Closed that means it was rejected
+    {
+        let mut data_mut_ref = overrule_proposal_status.borrow_mut();
+        *data_mut_ref = Status::Closed;
+    }
+    let msg2 = ExecuteMsg::ExecuteProposal { proposal_id: 11 };
+    let res = execute(deps.as_mut(), env.clone(), info.clone(), msg2.clone()).unwrap();
+    let expected_attributes = vec![
+        Attribute::new("action", "execute_proposal"),
+        Attribute::new("sender", "neutron1unknownsender"),
+        Attribute::new("proposal_id", "11"),
+    ];
+    assert_eq!(expected_attributes, res.attributes);
+    assert_eq!(
+        proposal
+            .msgs
+            .iter()
+            .map(|msg| SubMsg::reply_on_error(msg.clone(), proposal.id))
+            .collect::<Vec<SubMsg<NeutronMsg>>>(),
+        res.messages
+    );
+    let updated_prop = PROPOSALS.load(deps.as_mut().storage, 11).unwrap();
+    assert_eq!(ProposalStatus::Executed, updated_prop.status);
+
     // check that execution fails when there not exactly one message in proposal
     let proposal = SingleChoiceProposal {
         id: 10,

packages/cwd-pre-propose-base/src/execute.rs

@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ where
 
         // Save the deposit.
         //
-        // It is possibe that a malicious proposal hook could run
+        // It is possible that a malicious proposal hook could run
         // before us and update our config! We don't have to worry
         // about this though as the only way to be able to update our
         // config is to have root on the code module and if someone