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

Voting connector: Support vote statuses #336

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

PJColombo
Copy link

@PJColombo PJColombo commented Nov 7, 2021

This PR updates both the Voting connector and subgraph in order to expose the vote status following the DeepDao's Gitcoin bounty requirements.

The vote status can be one of the following:

-Ongoing: The vote hasn't ended.
-Accepted: The vote ended and it's waiting to be executed (pending).
-Rejected: The vote ended and it didn't reach the minimum accepted quorum nor minimum support.
-Executed: The vote was enacted.

I didn't include Created nor Started as I considered those to be redundant and could be encapsulated in Ongoing.

The same I did with Ended since we can consider a vote either Accepted or Rejected when it has ended.

If you want to quickly test the connector with these changes you can use a private subgraph that I deployed just for testing: https://thegraph.com/hosted-service/subgraph/pjcolombo/connect-voting-status

You only need to change the VOTING_SUBGRAPH_URL variable value here.

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Nov 7, 2021

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@PJColombo PJColombo changed the title Voting connector: Support statuses Voting connector: Support vote statuses Nov 7, 2021
@PJColombo PJColombo marked this pull request as ready for review November 7, 2021 17:02
Copy link
Contributor

@0xGabi 0xGabi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Well done! I left a minor suggestion.

I wonder if you consider using an enum for the status value instead of returning the string. What do you think of touching base with DeepDAO to know their preference about how to consume the status data?

Copy link
Contributor

@0xGabi 0xGabi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants