-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 822
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
Refactor conviction voting to have field names in events #5280
Conversation
78c2e2f
to
dd74d26
Compare
/// An account has delegated their vote to another account. | ||
Delegated { who: T::AccountId, target: T::AccountId }, | ||
/// An account has cancelled a previous delegation operation. | ||
Undelegated { who: T::AccountId }, |
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.
This change might break things for the clients. It's used in the governance. Not sure what we gain here.
I've seen the issue this PR trying to address. This is my personal opinion. I would not change it for existing events, specifically for the functionality that widely adopted. But for new events I would definitely use named fields.
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.
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.
Thanks for the ping. The benefit it brings is negligible compared to the amount of UIs this is potentially going to break, it's indeed not worth it IMHO.
Closing not to break existing clients |
Change to use Rust named event fields paritytech/substrate#9903
@paritytech/frame-coders @seadanda