-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 110
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
rethinking boost #1408
rethinking boost #1408
Conversation
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.
Looks good, played around with it and found an issue with comment boosts.
I also think we can do better with the icon. Flipping it only helps to distinguish it from zaps. But wouldn't be an arrow up be a better symbol for boosting? For example using arrow-up-double-line
:
It looks a bit like a rank insignia which can be associated with boosting something.
if (!failedInvoice) { | ||
throw new Error(`retryPaidAction - invoice not found or not in failed state ${actionType}`) | ||
} |
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.
I see, this is related to #1381. Would be nice to include the invoice id in the error message. I also think mentioning the action type in the front makes more sense else it sounds like the action type is the failed state:
retryPaidAction ${actionType} - invoice ${invoiceId} not found or not in failed state
If we assume people are looking to boost, I agree. Zooming out, if we assume people aren't looking to boost, my guess is it'd be kind of annoying to look at yet another icon imo. |
Mhh, interesting reasoning. This isn't considered to be a different icon since it's not different enough? Btw, I also wondered if you wanted to use |
Yeah, I thought it looked similar enough. Maybe not according to 0xBitcoiner |
closes #1351
closes #194
This is done. It can be improved but it's good enough imo.
The intent here is to:
TODO
EXTRA TODO