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

Burn should be an extension #25

Closed
JakeHartnell opened this issue Nov 9, 2021 · 1 comment
Closed

Burn should be an extension #25

JakeHartnell opened this issue Nov 9, 2021 · 1 comment

Comments

@JakeHartnell
Copy link
Collaborator

After talking with @the-frey, I think burnable NFTs should be an extension.

Open Zepplin does this: https://docs.openzeppelin.com/contracts/4.x/api/token/erc721

Burnable is a separate extension. We could make a cw721-plus with common extensions, but I think it would be best if you could extend a cw721 with each functionality you need. For example, Open Zepplin has contract extensions like ERC721Burnable, and it's easy to add the functionality you want to an ERC721.

@JakeHartnell
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Closing for now... maybe a bit of an over optimization (burn is already supported). Feeling differently about things after #42.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant