-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 91
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
chore: Fix review #907
chore: Fix review #907
Conversation
fix: deprecate incentive on dollar token
* feat: add setRoleAdmin to AccessControlFacet The setRoleAdmin can be only accessed by the admin. * feat: add setRoleAdmin to AccessControl interface * test: add testSetRoleAdmin_ShouldSetAdminRoleForGivenRole test * feat: update access control for setRoleAdmin * test: fix ShouldSetAdminRoleForGivenRole and add test for revert
feat: add getRedeemCollateralBalance() method
* fix: limit AMO minter borrow amount * test: assert free collateral amount
* feat: implement BlocksInWeek script task The BlocksInWeek task provides a very close approximate of number of blocks mined during one week. Supported networks: mainnnet, sepolia. Example usage: npx tsx scripts/task/task.ts BlocksInWeek --network=mainnet npx tsx scripts/task/task.ts BlocksInWeek --network=sepolia Resolves: sherlock-audit/2023-12-ubiquity-judging#230 * feat: update weekly block count to 49930 Set weekly block count to 49930 as measured in February 2024 npx tsx scripts/task/task.ts BlocksInWeek --network=mainnet ... Calculating number of blocks in the last week... Recent average block time: 12 seconds Estimated blocks in a week best case 50400 Produced 49930 blocks, 470 worst than the best case Resolves: sherlock-audit/2023-12-ubiquity-judging#230 * feat: rename task function to funcBlocksInAWeek As proposed during pull request review.
…-when-collateral-is-equal-to-zero Do not allow to mint dollar when collateral is equal to zero
feat: use CurveStableSwapMetaNG contract
Also add a unit test that verifies the check. Resolves: sherlock-audit/2023-12-ubiquity-judging#29
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I approve from my side as we reviewed this already when merging to fix-review branch. Just reformatting as suggested by @pavlovcik can be done in a separate pull request. About the changed test expected value, will need to check this carefully as well during staking issue investigation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looking good most of the others things that popped up can be referenced from this PR
Resolves #866
The
Check For Core Contracts Storage Changes
workflow is failing but it's expected since the incentives feature is removed hence the contract's storage layout has been updated