Court accounting #67
Merged
Court accounting #67
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
facuspagnuolo
changed the base branch from
split_final_round_3
to
split_staking_3
facuspagnuolo
force-pushed
the
court_accounting
branch
2 times, most recently
from
bce908b
to
ae8c556
Compare
facuspagnuolo
force-pushed
the
court_accounting
branch
3 times, most recently
from
40d63c9
to
c12b793
Compare
This was referenced Aug 1, 2019
facuspagnuolo
force-pushed
the
court_accounting
branch
from
c12b793
to
f018770
Compare
izqui
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2019
contracts/CourtAccounting.sol
Outdated
| owner = _owner; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| function deposit(ERC20 _token, address _to, uint256 _amount) external onlyOwner { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this function name is a bit strange given that the actual deposit of tokens in this contract must have already happened. I would rename it to assign or debit as what we are doing is just allowing the receiver to withdraw tokens in the future.
| @@ -802,7 +808,8 @@ contract Court is IStakingOwner, ICRVotingOwner, ISubscriptionsOwner { | |||
| terms[_draftTermId].dependingDrafts += 1; | |||
|
|
|||
| if (_feeAmount > 0) { | |||
| require(_feeToken.safeTransferFrom(msg.sender, address(staking), _feeAmount), ERROR_DEPOSIT_FAILED); | |||
| // TODO: can we do the transfer-from from the accounting itself? the disputer must approve the accounting contract in that case | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it is cleaner to approve the same contract that you interact with as it is right now, but either way is fine with me.
facuspagnuolo
force-pushed
the
court_accounting
branch
from
f7d8516
to
85afe51
Compare
7 tasks
facuspagnuolo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 12, 2020
* disputes: handle agreement metadata * disputes: fix agreements metadata handler * disputes: fix agreements metadata handler * disputes: use app ID for agreement dispute metadata header * disputes: allow disputable org to be null * disputes: fix agreement content mapping
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR introduces the concept of
CourtAccounting, a new contract responsible for holding funds related to fees and handling withdraws to the corresponding holders.