Update governance doc #83
Conversation
- Typo fix - Fix language - Changed type of `Threshold` - Re-arrange implementation section according to bucky's directives
|
|
||
| `Urgent` proposals also work with the aforementioned threshold, except there is another condition that can accelerate the acceptance of the proposal. Namely, if the ratio of `Yes` votes to `InitTotalVotingPower` exceeds 2/3, `UrgentProposal` will be immediately accepted, even if the `Voting period` is not finished. `InitTotalVotingPower` is the total voting power of all bonded Atom holders at the moment when the vote opens. | ||
| `Urgent` proposals also work with the aforementioned threshold, except there is another condition that can accelerate the acceptance of the proposal. Namely, if the ratio of `Yes` votes to `InitTotalVotingPower` exceeds 2:3, `UrgentProposal` will be immediately accepted, even if the `Voting period` is not finished. `InitTotalVotingPower` is the total voting power of all bonded Atom holders at the moment when the vote opens. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe use 67% percent rather than 2:3? either way we should make this uniform across all specs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sometimes it makes sense to use percentage and sometimes it makes sense to use ratio. I can't use 67% if it's a ratio.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's always use 67% then, 67% represents a ratio > 2:3 (by atleast 0.444444... %)
| And the pseudocode for the `ProposalProcessingQueue`: | ||
|
|
||
| ``` | ||
| in BeginBlock do |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure we want pseudo code here, looks like it could just as easily be a series of bullet points (with sub bullet points) of procedure ordering... But if we do end up wanting pseudo code we should probably begin the code at func checkProposal() and still used curly brackets around funcs, if, and for statements like in golang.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seeing that zarco did same formatting as me, I think we should keep it this way for now, so that it's uniform accross specs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
okay well remove the first few lines before func checkProposal() - that is implicit. Also I don't see how having the function name helps... just scanning through your pseudo code here, it's called within itself... which means that this is a recursive function... Is this what you wanted? - just want to make sure... we should probably be using the queue system instead of recursion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Talked with rigel, will use queue system+recursion. Fix to come
GOVERNANCE_DOC.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| for each validator in validators | ||
| if validator is not in votersList | ||
| slash validator by ActiveProcedure.GovernancePenalty |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we accomplish this without a for loop? I guess it doesn't really matter here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I mean I'm sure there is a way we could accomplish that if we needed to - I'm just not convinced we really care because, unlike block processing, this process doesn't happen very often. We're good..
GOVERNANCE_DOC.md
Outdated
| slash validator by ActiveProcedure.GovernancePenalty | ||
|
|
||
| ProposalProcessingQueueBeginning++ // ProposalProcessingQueue will have a new element | ||
| checkProposal() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Like I mentioned we should really not be using recursion here, add pseudo code referencing a queue element
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will add queue logic in recursive function
GOVERNANCE_DOC.md
Outdated
| ProposalProcessingQueueBeginning++ // ProposalProcessingQueue will have a new element | ||
| checkProposal() | ||
|
|
||
| else |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
else return at the end of a function is always implicit, please remove
|
Can we move this to the SDK? New home for gov spec: https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/tree/develop/docs/spec/governance |
|
Yes. I'm currently finishing the consolidation of the spec. I will commit here to keep track of the different steps. Then I'll make a new branch on cosmos-sdk and submit a PR there (1 massive commit). Will close this one then. |
|
Moved to sdk repo @ebuchman cosmos/cosmos-sdk#495 |
Threshold