boolafish
boolafish
Oops, did not notice we use `currency` in vault. I did not change the wording in EIP712 as the reason mentioned above....but if we are scoping to make it truly...
hmm....how about we do the change on the vault in this PR only as it would not break anything outside. For the change to EIP712, we create another issue and...
I recall the previous push back was from elixir side complexity though. We have [`OutputId`](https://github.com/omgnetwork/plasma-contracts/blob/1758349d2a9535fa736156711b226ddd01042edb/plasma_framework/contracts/src/exits/utils/OutputId.sol#L3) in our contract now so that should be the replacement if we'd like to commit...
As for splitting on piggyback, also need to be aware that probably not all inputs/outputs would be piggybacked. > I would lean towards awarding it to the challenger. I don't...
If we are auto processing the exits, option 2 feels more like a good operator 😅 so we are not trying to collect one more fee again for people exiting...
From the point of simplicity, probably just add the bond on piggyback but I don't think we should assume both inputs and outputs are piggybacked. Honestly probably assuming 1~2 are...
https://omgnetworkhq.slack.com/archives/C7V603752/p1599537940007200 TL;DR we might want to reconsider the "Alternate approach" where we use single value for bond and bounty after we discard the dynamic gas price for bounty. As the...
do we have example or document of how to use/call the Secure Enclave?
On the other hand, due to our sadly despot tx bytes not unique issue, the exitId relies on `utxoPos` for deposit tx while not needed for normal tx. In other...
hmmm, I am still not fully convinced we should include so many data in events, especially quite some data can probably be fetch from DB (eg. tx, inclusion proof) instead...