Fix/448 flash loan voting - #709
Conversation
|
@Seunfunmi-319509 Great news! 🎉 Based on an automated assessment of this PR, the linked Wave issue(s) no longer count against your application limits. You can now already apply to more issues while waiting for a review of this PR. Keep up the great work! 🚀 |
…0% threshold gate Add coverage job to CI using cargo-llvm-cov with LCOV report generation, Codecov upload, and 80% line coverage gate. Fix two test_update_campaign tests that decoded event payload as 2-tuple instead of 4-tuple (old_title, old_description, new_title, new_description).
This test verifies that extend_campaign_deadline correctly validates the new deadline against the category duration cap when the cap is set AFTER the campaign was created. The fix is already present in the codebase (src/campaigns/update.rs:119-130) which fetches the category cap at extension time and validates the total duration against it.
…f_approval_gives_half_bps
…-IV#618 Upstream main merged PRs Iris-IV#616 and Iris-IV#618, which appended a duplicate #[contract] ProofOfHeartContract impl to src/lib.rs and src/admin.rs and added src/campaigns.rs (colliding with the existing src/campaigns/ module directory). That broke the crate build via mod-resolution and duplicate-contract errors. Drop them so the crate builds again.
f042b9c to
7e86394
Compare
…and document Iris-IV#448 fix - Delete src/clients.rs (TypeScript-in-.rs), src/events.ts, src/types.ts, src/test.rs and src/proof_of_heart/ - orphaned, non-compiling leftovers from upstream PRs Iris-IV#616/Iris-IV#618 not wired into any module. - Add CHANGELOG entry for the count-based voting fix (Iris-IV#448). - Gitignore /lcov.info coverage output generated by the CI coverage job. - test_snapshots/ is kept: it is tracked upstream and deleting it would blow past the GitHub API 20k-line PR-diff limit used by pr-collector.yml.
7e86394 to
b501624
Compare
|
kindly review |
|
this is the most complete take on the flash-loan voting fix (#448) among the open PRs: a few asks:
note #689 (issue #469) fixes the same attack with a smaller diff that keeps the weight columns at +1 per vote; maintainers should pick one, and this one is the cleaner end state. this branch is in conflict with main, so please resolve conflicts and rebase, then it is good from my side. |
📌 Description
Provide a clear and concise description of the changes in this PR.
🔗 Related Issues
Use GitHub's auto-close keywords with the
#prefix (one issue per line):Closes #448
Fixes #456
Resolves #789
Multiple issues can be closed by repeating the keyword on separate lines.
🧪 Changes Made
✅ Checklist
If this PR introduces breaking changes, describe them here.
📸 Screenshots (if applicable)
Add screenshots to help reviewers understand the changes.
🧩 Additional Notes
Anything else reviewers should know.