Skip to content
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

54 delegation voting #75

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
May 10, 2018
Merged

54 delegation voting #75

merged 5 commits into from
May 10, 2018

Conversation

aecc
Copy link
Collaborator

@aecc aecc commented May 10, 2018

Fixes (2) in #54

  • Added possibility of vote
  • Added possibility of delegate
  • Delegations and votes displayed in the graphs

Graph is visualized correctly.

Some restrictions:

  1. There is still a single universal ballot (no support for voting in multiple ballots has been added)
  2. A ballot needs to be created before voting/delegation
  3. Any action on any ballot (including pre-created ones) will affect the single ballot existent
  4. Given the restriciton of Login automatically if voter exists #71 If you need to change voters (register a new voter after another one), you are required to remove local storage on the chrome settings or using localStorage.clear() in JS console
  5. In order for this PR to work correctly 73 IPFS client added and calls to @aecc's server #74 needs to be merged first
  6. After delegating/voting, you need to go back and forward (refresh) to display the result

We probably need to have some discussions about the data models. To allow multiple ballots to work correctly and efficiently

Current screenshot:

image

.gitignore Outdated
/package-lock.json
/bower_components
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can delete bower_components from here (and also in your local branch if you have this folder), the right location is in dApp-Svr-Exp/. This folder has a .gitignore file which already excludes bower_components

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok I will remove. I'm not sure how that folder arrived there though

@LucasIsasmendi LucasIsasmendi merged commit fe30e96 into master May 10, 2018
@medied
Copy link
Member

medied commented May 10, 2018

@aecc @LucasIsasmendi can someone provide me with more context on LiquidDemocracy.json and Migrations.json (both under /dApp-Srv-Exp/contracts)?

I see that they're basically the ABI but want to understand how they fit into code structure under dApp-Srv-Exp and root /contracts overall.

In PRs like this one the diffs are huge (+11,777 −8,139) because of the json files, assuming they can't be added to .gitignore

@LucasIsasmendi
Copy link
Member

Yes, we are adding that files to .gitignore, in the future all local runs should compile the contract

@LucasIsasmendi
Copy link
Member

Also we should improve ipfs files, they are more than 3MB each, is a lot for a min file.

@aecc aecc deleted the 54-delegation-voting branch May 11, 2018 07:59
@aecc
Copy link
Collaborator Author

aecc commented May 11, 2018

@LucasIsasmendi the old ipfs js it's not used anymore. However I recommend not to remove it if we are going for a local + remote approach on IPFS nodes.

@aecc
Copy link
Collaborator Author

aecc commented May 11, 2018

@medied I think @LucasIsasmendi already mentioned most of it. But something to add:
json files are compiled .sol contracts (using truffle) meant to be understood by web3 (web3 will take care of api calls to the blockchain using the APIs compiled in the jsons).
Also, because of limitations/bugs in truffle we need to copy them from /contracs/build/ to /dApp-Srv-Exp/contracts. /contracs/build/ is ignored, but /dApp-Srv-Exp/contracts not. Basically because I wanted to have the "deployed" contracts somewhere saved. But because there is no way to redeploy a contract without changing it. It's probably just better to store it in the place where we deploy it from (like heroku)

@medied
Copy link
Member

medied commented May 11, 2018

Okay this is useful context, thank you!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants