lqt: implement voting in pcli #5079
Merged
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
Base automatically changed from
cronokirby/lqt-vote-todo-fix
to
protocol/lqt_branch
February 8, 2025 11:45
Missed this in the last commit, needed later for planner, so we can push onto the ActionList.
Needed for the LQT, and also matches what prax does.
Was it really a good design to not just have a bunch of randomizers in auth data? Probably not, but oh well.
6373eff to
6551578
Compare
erwanor
approved these changes
Feb 8, 2025
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Stacked pr on #5077, please review and merge that first.
This implements all of the bits and bobs necessary to make
pcli tx lqt-votework. I ran a devnet and tested that you can submit votes. The events for voting do get emitted, but there seems to be some issue with either the code or the setup I had in terms of rewards actually being distributed.To test this pr, spinning up a devnet, or hitting a testnet post #5077 patch would work.
Checklist before requesting a review
I have added guiding text to explain how a reviewer should test these changes.
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: