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

Dev 285. Vesting contracts #60

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: fix-stake-change-policy-bugs
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Bromel777
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@Bromel777 Bromel777 force-pushed the DEV-285_vesting-contracts branch 8 times, most recently from eef8640 to a914150 Compare November 22, 2022 10:56
@Bromel777 Bromel777 force-pushed the DEV-285_vesting-contracts branch from a914150 to c80b3e2 Compare November 22, 2022 17:34
@Bromel777 Bromel777 force-pushed the DEV-285_vesting-contracts branch 6 times, most recently from d721921 to 3269c8a Compare January 12, 2023 10:11
@Bromel777 Bromel777 force-pushed the DEV-285_vesting-contracts branch from 3269c8a to 55059dc Compare July 15, 2023 13:20
@Bromel777 Bromel777 changed the base branch from DEV-254_debug-off to master July 15, 2023 13:29
@Bromel777 Bromel777 force-pushed the DEV-285_vesting-contracts branch from c2f3061 to 1255217 Compare July 15, 2023 13:54
@Bromel777 Bromel777 changed the base branch from master to fix-stake-change-policy-bugs July 15, 2023 13:54
@Bromel777 Bromel777 force-pushed the fix-stake-change-policy-bugs branch 2 times, most recently from 0abfe09 to 090b360 Compare July 17, 2023 13:30
@Bromel777 Bromel777 force-pushed the DEV-285_vesting-contracts branch from 195b4bc to adb0853 Compare July 19, 2023 18:12
@Bromel777 Bromel777 force-pushed the DEV-285_vesting-contracts branch from adb0853 to 7850574 Compare July 19, 2023 18:12

periodStartTime = periodAdditionalTime + vestingStart
validTime = pbefore # periodStartTime # validRange
validSignature = pall # (containsSignature' # sigs) # pkhs
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should support m-of-n, if one key is missing tokens are lost otherwise

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants