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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Skip required fees for gentx #3271

Open
rootulp opened this issue Apr 5, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Skip required fees for gentx #3271

rootulp opened this issue Apr 5, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees
@ninabarbakadze
Labels
enhancement New feature or request nice to have item is not blocking or required. WS: Maintenance 🔧 includes bugs, refactors, flakes, and tech debt etc

Comments

@rootulp
Copy link
Collaborator

rootulp commented Apr 5, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Context

Problem

The addition of x/minfee made it required for gentx transactions to include a fee. I'm not sure if that was actually intentional.

Proposal

Explore the Cosmos Hub's minfee implementation. Apparently they skip required fees for the first block. If possible, apply something similar to our implementation.
@rootulp rootulp added enhancement New feature or request WS: Fee Market 🏛️ nice to have item is not blocking or required. labels Apr 5, 2024
@rootulp rootulp removed the nice to have item is not blocking or required. label May 16, 2024
@rootulp
Copy link
Collaborator Author

rootulp commented May 16, 2024 •
edited
Loading

cc: @ninabarbakadze @cmwaters this caused setup pain for three separate issues so IMO we should at least discuss it.

@rootulp rootulp mentioned this issue May 16, 2024
Closed
@rootulp rootulp added needs:discussion item needs to be discussed as a group in the next sync. if marking an item, pls be prepped to talk needs:triage and removed WS: Fee Market 🏛️ labels May 16, 2024
@rootulp rootulp removed the x/minfee label May 24, 2024
@evan-forbes
Copy link
Member

to close this issue, we can skip the minfee antehandler on block height 1. Technically this consensus breaking, if this more involved than an if statement, then we won't pursue this and just fix our tests. However, if it is that simple, then we will pursue this. cc @cmwaters to make sure you are aware as well.

@evan-forbes evan-forbes removed needs:discussion item needs to be discussed as a group in the next sync. if marking an item, pls be prepped to talk needs:triage labels May 27, 2024
@evan-forbes evan-forbes added needs:discussion item needs to be discussed as a group in the next sync. if marking an item, pls be prepped to talk WS: V3 3️⃣ item is directly relevant to the v3 hardfork and removed needs:discussion item needs to be discussed as a group in the next sync. if marking an item, pls be prepped to talk labels Jul 1, 2024
@rootulp rootulp modified the milestone: v3 Sep 12, 2024
@evan-forbes evan-forbes added nice to have item is not blocking or required. WS: Maintenance 🔧 includes bugs, refactors, flakes, and tech debt etc and removed WS: V3 3️⃣ item is directly relevant to the v3 hardfork labels Sep 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@ninabarbakadze ninabarbakadze

Labels
enhancement New feature or request nice to have item is not blocking or required. WS: Maintenance 🔧 includes bugs, refactors, flakes, and tech debt etc
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@rootulp @evan-forbes @ninabarbakadze