-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 754
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
[stable2409] Backport #6540 #6592
Merged
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ | ||
# Schema: Polkadot SDK PRDoc Schema (prdoc) v1.0.0 | ||
# See doc at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/master/prdoc/schema_user.json | ||
|
||
title: Only allow apply slash to be executed if the slash amount is atleast ED | ||
|
||
doc: | ||
- audience: Runtime User | ||
description: | | ||
This change prevents `pools::apply_slash` from being executed when the pending slash amount of the member is lower | ||
than the ED. With this change, such small slashes will still be applied but only when member funds are withdrawn. | ||
|
||
crates: | ||
- name: pallet-nomination-pools-runtime-api | ||
bump: patch | ||
- name: pallet-nomination-pools | ||
bump: major | ||
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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 do we currently deal with backporting major changes? Something smells about that, depending how far back we go
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.
@seadanda I assume it will only patch the existing release.
Also, practically this may not be a breaking change (I think). The client gets the new type information from the metadata, and the module error is only really for error description. Changes in Storage or RuntimeCall are more critical as some dapp's business logic may depend on it.
I could make one of the following change if that helps: