Leszek Wiesner

https://github.com/Joystream/joystream/issues/4046#issuecomment-1199179759

> Distinct set of locks to be avoided for distinct costs in the same pallet. There are valid use cases for this currently, for example, when purchasing tokens on a...

> doesn't make sense to implement it, you would be just testing a mock function. You would be testing at least whether it's actually being called when expected or not....

> Damn, this is so bad (...) I agree, I cannot think of any "clean" solution at the moment. Initially I thought we could alternatively create our own type (for...

> Initially I thought we could alternatively create our own type (for example StakingCurrency) that implements Currency and LockableCurrency and just override the set_lock method, but unfortunately this method is...

> But Solution 2 is obviously the correct approach. How long would it take to implement the fixes? I think I can fix issues identified in https://github.com/Joystream/joystream/pull/4374 within an hour

> Unlike joystream-node --dev you will need to purge-chain between runs: > `joystream-node purge-chain --chain prod` It's also possible to use `--tmp` flag when running the chain, in this case...

# Market Cap and Resource Pricing > The key purpose of fees is to deter possible abuse of the liveness of the system by hostile actors, there is also a...

> Second, I'm not sure I understood why it was that normal validator payments was not feasible to cover this $5,184 / year expensive? at 3%, with stated cap, this...

> I tried to pin down where ExistentialDeposit: Balance = currency::MILLICENTS actually came from, seeing it on Carthage, perhaps I took that as a Kusama value or something?\ Kusama's value...