-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
docs: add data provider consent spec for protocol devs #592
Conversation
.gitbook/3-protocol-devs/1-dep-specs/3-data-provider-consent.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
.gitbook/3-protocol-devs/1-dep-specs/3-data-provider-consent.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
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.
LGTM
I have a question.
Do we call blockchain names a Panacea
in docs?
I ask for unification to other documents as well.
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.
Good
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.
lgtm
Yes. Let's use Panacea until we have a clear decision for naming. There are still so many discussions/feedbacks about naming, but it's not simple to decide within only the blockchain team. |
OK. Thanks |
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.
LGTM
Based on #567, added specs of data provider consent for protocol devs