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
Introduce SequentialOperations abstraction for signature-based ops #3850
Conversation
… between Votes and ERC20Permit
57aab49
to
c02c77c
Compare
Abstraction related to this implementation is also discussed here: ethereum/EIPs#6077 |
af72e52
to
31e96f0
Compare
…and signature-based operations like ERC20Permit, Votes, Governor, MinimalForwarder
31e96f0
to
4f3422c
Compare
… Governor, since it is relying on child contract to invalidate by proposalId and voter.
Hello @k06a This looks like a very significant change. You are rightfully targeting next-5.0 as this would be breaking. Still, I believe we should have more discussion before jumping to an implementation. I appreciate that there is standardization effort making an ERC with that, but it is still in a very early stage, and likely to evolve. Maybe a good option would be to keep the current interface/approach, and "just" change the storage under the hood to be future proof and allow this to be implemented as a non-storage-breaking change during 5.x lifecycle. There are other nonce related changes that we could implement. I'm thinking of the timeline system described here. Lets discuss features first. Don't worry, the 5.0 train is not leaving anytime soon :) |
Note: we might reopen this based on the discussion in #3927 |
@k06a please explain where operationHash comes from? |
@TrejGun it depends on specific operation EIP/definition. |
@k06a can you show any example? |
@TrejGun my bad, you should use EIP-712 for structured data hash. |
@k06a did you abstract this code as
I ask this because I really like this abstraction and it does not look like you are doing this in solidity so maybe in JS and I want to understand how. For now I use looks like |
@k06a thanks |
Beware that this PR is build on top of #3848 and includes its commits
PR Checklist
TBD