Replies - Activity - ipaleka - Algorand

Questions on xGov Priority Areas and Impact Evaluation

I’ll do that then, thank you!

Thank you for your answer! Yes, all of the repos involved are under the custody of the same GitHub organization. I don’t feel creating a dedicated “non-official” thread is necessary - the only issue I had was that, across all the guides here, only the singular has been used to describe the “open source repository”.

This comment might be a bit off-topic, but the post title was too good to pass up! We’re planning to submit a major xGov proposal, but we’re facing a structuring issue. The proposal is tied to a primary open-source repository that involves a directly dependent submodule repository (there’s actually a structuring issue).

Tnx Adri for your support! Btw, I forgot to say one important part, I’m not planning to just resubmit, the plan is to take into account comments from:

Take a look here:

xGov Quorum

This is the democratic quorum, where one xGov = one Vote. It is the attention that a proposal needs to be valid. Abstaining (or “Null” votes) affects this quorum.

Approval thresholds

Btw, this confirms what I said in the comment you replied to: there are only two options, retroactive and proactive. Is it possible that this means that there’s no institute of quantity measurement available to the Council to mark some retroactive proposal invalid? That the Council is able to invalidate proposals retroactively?

Yes, the TEAL/pyTeal part of the repository is basically that. The ASA Stats project doesn’t need any other on-chain capabilities besides retrieving users’ data. The focus is completely on security, the pyTeal code does exactly what we need, while unit tests and especially integration tests are there to ensure reliability.

I created the first version of the dApp and afterwards spent almost two full days trying to figure out why the user box name doesn’t exactly translate to the user address. The problem is in this line that adds a byte when the abi.String is used. So a little bird told me to use a different data type instead.

From Algorand Discord discussion: BunsanMuchi | Vestige.fi — 10/07/2022 As for dApps off the top of my head that would be interested in setting a standard I would say all the ones that are building P. Managers (from the directory that I believe are still active, sorry if I missed one):

That said, I like the proposed bottom-up approach (starting a repository of common snippets that people can contribute to and that is eventually standardized) more than a top-down approach (starting from a standard that then likely is not used).

Absolutely not - me in that sentence represents the average Algorand blockchain user.