sudo rm -rf --no-preserve-root /
sudo rm -rf --no-preserve-root /
> not that is a documentation issue Well, this somehow contradicts @frangio's message [here](https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/issues/3884#issue-1500855000), no? > Agree, but we don't keep things just because they might be useful, I believe...
> Do you know any relevant system based on EIP-2771? > Aside from GSN, do we know other players relying on a forwarder implementation? Ad-hoc, I know that Reddit relied...
Sorry for being pedantic here, but the PR does not include any user-facing documentation wrt the overflow (except in the `CHANGELOG`). Do you plan to add something [here](https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/next-v5.0/contracts/token/ERC1155/extensions/ERC1155Supply.sol#L28) since it...
I would like to quickly highlight that OZ has always been focused on getting the on-chain behavior right in first place. That's why for example my PR was not accepted...
FWIW, Curve's founder @michwill mentioned to me that some old Curve contracts might break. Tagging him here since it's important enough.
Another contract (`Curve.fi: Compound Swap`) that would be affected is this one [here](https://etherscan.io/address/0xa2b47e3d5c44877cca798226b7b8118f9bfb7a56#code). See function `remove_liquidity_imbalance`.
> @pcaversaccio That contract would not be affected. Again, **this solely affects `transferFrom` invocations and not all that are performed with a value of `0`**. In the code you reference,...
If this is the case, let me push that idea further - what about `0.8.18` (the latest version)? The reason why I would love to consider this version explicitly, it...
Since we extended the scope of this issue, I amended the title for clarity fyi.
https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/issues/4059#issuecomment-1438021398 @ernestognw @frangio is this somewhere tracked as a separate issue so we don't forget about?