Dao - Validator Voting #5
Conversation
…'s and GetStake calls
peak3d
force-pushed
the
dao
branch
2 times, most recently
from
45f07ee to
dc86a77
Compare
| @@ -254,6 +248,17 @@ func (vm *VM) stake( | |||
| }) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // Handle fees after stake to reduce UTXO generation | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd move this change to dedicated PR, so we can separatly test and merge it without consideration of other changes
|
|
||
| proposalCache := service.vm.internalState.DaoProposalChainState() | ||
| proposal, err := proposalCache.GetActiveProposal(args.DaoProposalID) | ||
| if err == nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd change this and code below to err != nil with error response on not found proposal. It will be more clear this way, imho
| @@ -2060,63 +2322,63 @@ type GetStakeReply struct { | |||
| // Returns: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd replace index int with enum
| @@ -53,6 +56,8 @@ type TxFeeConfig struct { | |||
| CreateSubnetTxFee uint64 `json:"createSubnetTxFee"` | |||
| // Transaction fee for create blockchain transactions | |||
| CreateBlockchainTxFee uint64 `json:"createBlockchainTxFee"` | |||
| // Fee that must be burned by every create staker transaction | |||
| AddStakerTxFee uint64 `json:"addStakerTxFee"` | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Must be supported wth changes in camino-node
| @@ -42,6 +43,8 @@ type StakingConfig struct { | |||
| MaxStakeDuration time.Duration `json:"maxStakeDuration"` | |||
| // RewardConfig is the config for the reward function. | |||
| RewardConfig reward.Config `json:"rewardConfig"` | |||
| // DaoConfig is the config for the dao function. | |||
| DaoConfig dao.Config `json:"daoConfig"` | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Must be supported wth changes in camino-node
| @@ -217,6 +218,35 @@ func (fx *Fx) VerifyCredentials(tx Tx, in *Input, cred *Credential, out *OutputO | |||
| return nil | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // GetPublicKeys recovers public keys from tx and Signature and stores it | |||
| // in the map provided. | |||
| func (fx *Fx) GetPublicKeys(iTx, iCreds, iMap interface{}) error { | |||
|
|
||
| // Computes the id of this proposal | ||
| func (d *Proposal) computeID() (ids.ID, error) { | ||
| toSerialize := [5]uint64{d.ProposalType, d.Wght, d.Start, d.End, uint64(d.Thresh)} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not just use proposal tx ID? To prevent proposals of similar type exist at the same time?
As I understand, 2 proposals could have equal ID only if they'll start and end on the same time with the same weight, tresh. and type. But they could still contain different data, which will mean that they'r different.
Can you, please, explain idea behind this ID in general
| // Our Dao Proposal | ||
| DaoProposal dao.Proposal `serialize:"true" json:"daoProposal"` | ||
|
|
||
| // Where to send locked tokens when done voting |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Its locked outs on tx execution, no on end of voting, right?
| copy(outs, tx.Outs) | ||
| copy(outs[len(tx.Outs):], tx.Locks) | ||
|
|
||
| if vm.bootstrapped.GetValue() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Stupid question for my education: why do we need node bootstrapped here? Not doubting, just wanna understand better
| errVotingTooLong = errors.New("voting period is too long") | ||
| errAlreadyValidator = errors.New("node is already a validator") | ||
|
|
||
| _ UnsignedProposalTx = &UnsignedDaoProposalTx{} |
| stakedAmt, outs, err := service.getStakeHelper(tx, addrs) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| for i := 0; i < 3; i++ { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This whole thing with for-loop and if-s inside looks messy and hard to understand. I'd rewrite it
|
This PR is now outdated (see #269), so I'm closing it. |
Validator DAO Voting
(Must be called from one of the addresses the stake was provided)
In case the proposal time has ended, only the state (voted / unknown) is returned
AddDaoProposal includes a start timestamp (must be > now + 20 secs) and an end timestamp.
You can pass 0 as startTime (now) and a number of seconds (end) and the API will base this on timestamp now.
Default settings (genesis) will be documented in https://docs.camino.foundation
There is a check for duplicate ProposalType / ProposalData combinations -> they will be rejected.
Only one vote per Validator is possible, even your stake is made out of n addresses / UTXO's
Currently all Proposals and Votes live in the chain state and can be queried. There are plans that we discard old proposals (+ Votes) after a longer time to save reources.Deleting directly at the time the proposal ends would be not a good idea because there need to be time to handle actions based on the result (like addValidator).
When a proposal period ends, for accepted proposals only the proposalID is stored in state to allow later verification.
Non-accepted votes will be dicarded from state, an can only be reproduced using history transactions.