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

fix: ccm transfers should charge broker fee #5127

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

dandanlen
Copy link
Collaborator

Pull Request

Closes: PRO-1545

Checklist

Please conduct a thorough self-review before opening the PR.

  • I am confident that the code works.
  • I have updated documentation where appropriate.

Summary

Adds the broker fees to the ChannelAction::CcmTransfer variant and passes them to the swap request.

I will add the migration in the release branch since this is going straight to release/1.5.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 7, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 77.77778% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 71%. Comparing base (ea2c13f) to head (469287c).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
state-chain/pallets/cf-ingress-egress/src/lib.rs 75% 1 Missing ⚠️
...ingress-egress/src/migrations/add_refund_params.rs 80% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##            main   #5127     +/-   ##
=======================================
- Coverage     71%     71%     -0%     
=======================================
  Files        442     460     +18     
  Lines      76827   81513   +4686     
  Branches   76827   81513   +4686     
=======================================
+ Hits       54655   57973   +3318     
- Misses     19237   20445   +1208     
- Partials    2935    3095    +160     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

channel_metadata,
} => ChannelAction::CcmTransfer {
destination_asset,
destination_address,
broker_fees,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Isn't the more correct thing to do here to delete the migration? It'll be applied on 1.5 so we don't need to update this

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is a hotfix and should go directly into 1.5 I believe. My understanding (from chatting with @dandanlen) is that we will integrate this fix (in some form) directly into #5106.

@dandanlen dandanlen mentioned this pull request Aug 8, 2024
2 tasks
@dandanlen dandanlen marked this pull request as draft August 9, 2024 12:06
@dandanlen
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Yes, migration should have been deleted. I'll delete this since I think it will be easier to add with/after #5106

@dandanlen dandanlen closed this Aug 9, 2024
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.

4 participants