Internal Governance Demo

[Chris-Hibbert]

What is the Problem Being Solved?

Give a demo to the team of how the pieces of the governance system interact

Description of the Design

Tentatively scheduled for 9/27. That's at risk since @Chris-Hibbert is OOO 9/23-24 and @rowgraus is OOO though 9/22.

• Gov Demo - Google Slides
• https://gov-demo-ag-2.netlify.app/
• https://github.com/agoric-labs/gov-demo1

Security Considerations

None

Test Plan

a few run-throughs.

[dckc]

I sorta got a UI working: https://github.com/agoric-labs/gov-demo1

older screenshot

The first roughly-working version, 65ccaaf, was about 550 LOC, not counting stuff I copied from dapp-card-store more or less verbatim:

$ wc package.json index.html src/*.js
   46    95  1205 package.json
  110   270  3441 index.html
  318   762  9150 src/main.js
   81   318  2557 src/ui.js
  555  1445 16353 total

$ wc public/agoric-wallet.html src/utils/fetch-websocket.js 
  77  234 2741 public/agoric-wallet.html
 206  537 5811 src/utils/fetch-websocket.js
 283  771 8552 total

cc @samsiegart @michaelfig @katelynsills

[dckc]

@michaelfig it works from localhost, but when I deploy to https://gov-demo-ag-2.netlify.app/ I get a 404 when connecting to the wallet.

I suppose I should be able to find the configuration stuff that I neglected to preserve when I was adapting code from dapp-card-store, but maybe you could find it faster?

The netlify stuff is deploying from https://github.com/dckc/gov-demo1 (cuz it looks like I lack some relevant magic powers for agoric-labs).

[katelynsills]

That's super impressive!

[dckc]

It's deployed at https://gov-demo-ag-2.netlify.app/ (currently rev a481149)

Thanks, @michaelfig and @samsiegart for @agoric/wallet-connection

[dckc]

We went thru the demo today. Recording is available internally.

We used rev 3fab61b of https://github.com/agoric-labs/gov-demo1/network/members for the demo, plus the committee registrar contract from the contractGovernanceMgr-3185.

[dckc]

@dtribble @katelynsills @Chris-Hibbert @rowgraus should these be issues? (the conservative answer to that question is always "yes"...)

• @dtribble found the terminology in the design diagrams and the API confusing. For example:
  • A registrar corresponds to an electorate; "Electorate" is easier to talk about in some ways.
• A separate vat per vote counter seems ... awkward? expensive?
  • CH: one motivation is checkable terms
    • DT: the contract governor seems like the authority on questions; we could rely on that rather than zoe for terms. or maybe the vote counter
    • KS: this use of zoe does protect against giving one answer now and then another later... so we'd have to be careful if we use on another mechanism

p.s. I suppose @katelynsills is reviewing #3448 , so we can use that for follow-up.

[Chris-Hibbert]

I wrote a note-to-self on finding something public-facing to rename to be the electorate. An issue for that would be a fine thing, though I'm not sure it will be done as a separate task.

An issue on whether and how to maintain the verifiability of vote counters without one vat per vote would be a fine thing.

[zarutian]

On dtribbler terminology note: I got the impression that Registrar kept the records on who, in a sense, are part of the electorate and can cast votes in governance voting that relie on that Registrar.