view(proto): remove reserves from auction withdrawal TransactionPlannerRequest
#4270
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
erwanor
added
protobuf-breaking-changes
|
This is a protobuf breaking change, so I will want a +1 and ACK before I go on to override the lint and merge. |
|
Backing up a bit, why does the caller need to specify these in the request at all? Certainly they need to be known to plan the transaction, but should it be the caller's responsibility to supply the correct values, or should that be the responsibility of the view service that's processing the request? |
cronokirby
approved these changes
Apr 25, 2024
erwanor
added
protobuf-changes
TalDerei
approved these changes
Apr 25, 2024
|
Let's remove the fields entirely, per @cronokirby's suggestion in discord |
hdevalence
changed the title
ValuesTransactionPlannerRequest
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Describe your changes
Accidentally defined theTransactionPlannerRequestauction withdraw submessage to specify the user reserves inAmount. But we need those to compute a balance commitment, and this requires the asset id.@hdevalence noticed that we can defer populating this data to the view service (which is where we would have gotten it from in the first place!)
Checklist before requesting a review
If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the "consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason: