-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 117
fix(tests): fix/remove kmd rewards failing test #2633
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
Changes from 1 commit
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -2493,6 +2493,8 @@ impl From<TendermintFeeDetails> for TxFeeDetails { | |
| #[derive(Clone, Debug, Deserialize, PartialEq, Serialize)] | ||
| pub struct KmdRewardsDetails { | ||
| amount: BigDecimal, | ||
| /// Note that we don't have a case where this boolean is set to false. | ||
| /// It persists here though for backward compatibility and potential future use cases. | ||
| claimed_by_me: bool, | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Let's just remove the field IMO. The BC is nothing like a big deal (people can simply remove it from their use-case). I am not even sure if there is a real-user depending on this field.
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. agreed, we better remove it all together. cc/ @shamardy what do u think? and we can edit method names to de-reflect that
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I am fine with removing it |
||
| } | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.