Skip to content
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

feat!: Add start time for continuous vesting accounts #17810

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Oct 18, 2023

Conversation

cmwaters
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This is a cherry-pick from celestiaorg#342 based on this comment here #4287 (comment). It allows for a vesting account to start at some future defined start time


Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • included the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
  • provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
  • followed the guidelines for building modules
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • included comments for documenting Go code
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • run make lint and make test
  • confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

  • confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic
  • reviewed API design and naming
  • reviewed documentation is accurate
  • reviewed tests and test coverage
  • manually tested (if applicable)

@cmwaters cmwaters requested a review from a team as a code owner September 19, 2023 13:50
@github-prbot github-prbot requested a review from a team September 19, 2023 13:50
@github-prbot github-prbot requested review from facundomedica and samricotta and removed request for a team September 19, 2023 13:50
Copy link
Collaborator

@odeke-em odeke-em left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for this change @cmwaters! I've added some comments that'll improve the dynamic scaling of time periods and allow you to easily check spendability or vesting

x/auth/vesting/types/vesting_account_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
x/auth/vesting/types/vesting_account_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@julienrbrt julienrbrt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

utACK!

@@ -70,8 +74,12 @@ func (s msgServer) CreateVestingAccount(ctx context.Context, msg *types.MsgCreat
if msg.Delayed {
vestingAccount = types.NewDelayedVestingAccountRaw(baseVestingAccount)
} else {
sdkctx := sdk.UnwrapSDKContext(ctx)
vestingAccount = types.NewContinuousVestingAccountRaw(baseVestingAccount, sdkctx.HeaderInfo().Time.Unix())
start := msg.StartTime
Copy link
Member

@julienrbrt julienrbrt Oct 5, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually, we should add a check that it does not start in the past and that start is a valid time ( >= 0)

Missing the <= 0 check for instance.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Whats the effect of starting at the past? That instantly a portion will be vested right?

Copy link
Member

@julienrbrt julienrbrt Oct 11, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Probably, but that is a weird use case. Avoiding starting in the past can avoid people making fat-finger mistakes.

@tac0turtle tac0turtle enabled auto-merge October 18, 2023 11:50
@tac0turtle tac0turtle added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 18, 2023
Merged via the queue into cosmos:main with commit e89a0cc Oct 18, 2023
48 of 49 checks passed
@rootulp
Copy link
Contributor

rootulp commented Sep 13, 2024

@julienrbrt @tac0turtle which Cosmos SDK releases was this included in? I couldn't find it in the changelog.

@julienrbrt julienrbrt mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2024
12 tasks
@mergify mergify bot mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2024
12 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants