colw/2637 withdraw from 1-5 validators at a time #2647
Conversation
- Add address to `withdrawAllRewards` action
If present, add array of single validator address
else use all validators with rewards
- Add button below delegation / undelegation validator section
- Create new Modal for single withdrawal. Streamlined from multiple
variant
colw
changed the title
| type: String, | ||
| required: true | ||
| }, | ||
| rewards: { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thinking about the ActionModal webcomponent, does it make sense to make the rewards an input? Or would we wrap this in a controller?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yep, I thought about this. I believe wrapping any future ActionModal web component in a controller is better.
IMHO, the Modals should be 'dumb' views, and at most receive data and forward user actions, but that's it. Separation of concerns.
Note: We should incrementally move all views to this approach.
- Remove some cruft
- Keep data conversions out of the modal - Clean withdraw all modal - Replace WithdrawAll modal with singular modal
Remove mapActions in favour so of calling $store directly.
colw
changed the title
| <span class="input-suffix">{{ denom | viewDenom }}</span> | ||
| <TmField id="amount" :value="rewards | atoms | fullDecimals" readonly /> | ||
| </TmFormGroup> | ||
| <span v-if="!validatorAddress" class="form-message"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should the message show always or only when the user actually has more then 5 delegations?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, is it necessary? We could leave it there to inform the user regardless?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I personally like to reduce noise that is not important to users. @jbibla preferences?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- It could have a minor impact on the message wording. The current phrasing is generic.
| ) { | ||
| const top5Delegations = getTop5Delegations(getters.committedDelegations) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should only limit to 5 delegations if the user is using the Ledger Nano S, but we can figure this out once we have more signers
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Indeed. There's some time to spare before the Nano X is in wide distribution, and we'll need to detect the difference. Is that right?
colw
force-pushed
the
colw/2637-withdraw-from-single-validator
branch
from
d1180af
to
0ddf8a1
Compare
Closes #2637
Description:
Withdraw in one of two ways:
If there are no rewards from a given validator, the button is disabled:
The modal supports both variations and displays a message when withdrawing globally.
Message:
Note: Lunie withdraws only the top 5 rewards at a time.Thank you! 🚀
For contributor:
yarn changelogfor a guided process.Files changedin the github PR explorerFor reviewer: