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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Lowering Deposit Requirements on Polkadot and Kusama Asset Hub #45
Lowering Deposit Requirements on Polkadot and Kusama Asset Hub #45
Changes from 30 commits
d3f3e16
4c90e8e
a1c6854
316cd45
7d5e9c3
0a217aa
4ba607f
d40dffd
6d297fb
0e49a4f
3b48582
cef02e1
88c0f69
cfc84ed
a15b1bd
edf6758
4079c29
e9a81d4
28e217a
9541841
5b34f67
4237d37
a3d3cb1
731d0c1
d16fa29
c464459
17b5448
3328781
33194da
23b9bab
c6e9970
f519da0
f4fa857
a8dcdf2
3ad68dd
759c140
823013e
0bb0f60
a7319f0
c7edfc3
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How did you generate these inputs? Not saying they are wrong, would just like to see a note about it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey sure!
https://github.com/vikiival/rfc-pricing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Interesting, 20x increase.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's why we propose a further reduction for itemDeposit in the next paragraph by 40
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What is the System Collective?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
https://forum.polkadot.network/t/polkadot-assethub-high-nft-collection-deposit/4262/16
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah I see, OK but that doesn't exist, so it's an extra step of creating this collective (which has turned out to be a bit like herding cats). I think for simplicity and fewer dependencies I would recommend setting it to some existing track (or even a new one) like General Admin.
Then if someone proposes a collective, they can propose the other way around, as in that their collective's origin gains permissions of this action.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we can probably do a combination of these two. It'd require some implementation, so switching to
deposit()
would be phase one, and then we could do something like:min(F1, F2)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm curious about the motivation behind increasing the deposit based on the number of collections. If the proposed floor deposits are too low to prevent spam, in theory, the function will adjust the deposit value to a more reasonable one and continue to grow, potentially raising a barrier for creators again.
This leads me to think that the primary challenge is to find an optimal deposit value, which depends on the DOT/USD price and our current technology state (as mentioned by @burdges here). If there is no optimal value, we will need to explore technical solutions.
If what I've said withstands criticism, we could have a scale factor parameter that can be changed through a referendum and deposits could also be linked to the USD price. Additionally, we should explore and learn how to estimate such an optimal deposit value.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We've kept silliness like smart contracts off AssetHub, so in theory AssetHub should benefit fully form our scalablity, meaning AssetHub could aquire more capacity form polkadot. We do not even have elastic scaling yet though, much less confidence that AssetHub eploits it properly, so "optimal" sounds unknowable right now, or more it could change.