You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Predecessors can be optional and user should not be forced to provide an
empty value if not needed on the API for `NewProposal` and
`NewTimelockProposal`. This commit introduces a functional option for
`predecessors` and making that config optional, so the api is cleaner.
This change was created after a brief discussion with James.
This is a breaking change, so open to recommendations if we want to do
it or not ( do we care enough?) but better do it now than later before
we have more users.
This is our official first breaking change, this will be a major version
bump.
@@ -49,7 +49,9 @@ For the JSON structure of the proposal please check the [MCMS Proposal Format Do
49
49
50
50
### Build Proposal Given Staged but Non-Executed Predecessor Proposals
51
51
52
-
In scenarios where a proposal is generated with the assumption that multiple proposals are executed beforehand, you can enable proposals to be signed in parallel with a pre-determined execution order. This can be achieved by passing a list of files as the second argument in the Proposal constructor, as shown below:
52
+
In scenarios where a proposal is generated with the assumption that multiple proposals are executed beforehand,
53
+
you can enable proposals to be signed in parallel with a pre-determined execution order. This can be achieved
54
+
by passing a list of files using the `WithPredecessors` functional option, as shown below:
0 commit comments