Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

feat(wallet-dashboard): consider max ptb size on timelocked staking #5108

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Feb 5, 2025
Merged

feat(wallet-dashboard): consider max ptb size on timelocked staking #5108

merged 13 commits into from
Feb 5, 2025

Conversation

panteleymonchuk
Copy link
Contributor

@panteleymonchuk panteleymonchuk commented Jan 31, 2025 •
edited by cpl121
Loading

Description:

Follow the same instruction for testing functionality like in #5086
Change maxSizeBytes in the file useNewStakeTransaction.ts to 64.

Links to any relevant issues

Depends on #5086

Closes #5009

How the change has been tested

Describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes.

Make sure to provide instructions for the maintainer as well as any relevant configurations.

Change checklist

Tick the boxes that are relevant to your changes, and delete any items that are not.

  • I have followed the contribution guidelines for this project
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have checked that new and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes

@panteleymonchuk panteleymonchuk requested a review from a team as a code owner January 31, 2025 09:34
@vercel Vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Jan 31, 2025 •
edited
Loading

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
wallet-dashboard ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Feb 5, 2025 11:49am
3 Skipped Deployments
Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
apps-ui-kit ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Visit Preview Feb 5, 2025 11:49am
apps-backend ⬜️ Skipped (Inspect) Feb 5, 2025 11:49am
rebased-explorer ⬜️ Skipped (Inspect) Feb 5, 2025 11:49am

@panteleymonchuk panteleymonchuk added the wallet-dashboard Issues related to the Wallet Dashboard dApp label Jan 31, 2025
@iota-ci iota-ci added the tooling Issues related to the Tooling team label Jan 31, 2025
@panteleymonchuk panteleymonchuk linked an issue Jan 31, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
Max ptb size when calling timelock stake: the max stakable amount must take into account the technical limitations of the ptb #5009
Closed
@panteleymonchuk panteleymonchuk changed the title feat(dashboard): the max stakable amount must take into account the technical limitations of the ptb feat(dashboard): the max stakable amount must take into account the technical limitations of the ptb for timelock objects Jan 31, 2025
brancoder
brancoder requested changes Jan 31, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@brancoder brancoder left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks great and works well just a couple of small suggestions for message changes.

@begonaalvarezd begonaalvarezd changed the title feat(dashboard): the max stakable amount must take into account the technical limitations of the ptb for timelock objects feat(dashboard): count on max ptb size on timelocked staking Jan 31, 2025
@begonaalvarezd begonaalvarezd changed the title feat(dashboard): count on max ptb size on timelocked staking feat(wallet-dashboard): count on max ptb size on timelocked staking Jan 31, 2025
@begonaalvarezd begonaalvarezd changed the title feat(wallet-dashboard): count on max ptb size on timelocked staking feat(wallet-dashboard): consider max ptb size on timelocked staking Jan 31, 2025
@panteleymonchuk panteleymonchuk force-pushed the tooling-dashboard/handle-max-timelock-objects branch from 197f717 to 6ec25ca Compare January 31, 2025 15:46
@vercel vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – rebased-explorer January 31, 2025 15:46 Inactive
@vercel vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – apps-backend January 31, 2025 15:46 Inactive
@panteleymonchuk panteleymonchuk force-pushed the tooling-dashboard/handle-max-timelock-objects branch from 6ec25ca to d213d01 Compare January 31, 2025 15:50
@vercel vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – apps-backend January 31, 2025 15:50 Inactive
@vercel vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – rebased-explorer January 31, 2025 15:50 Inactive
brancoder
brancoder approved these changes Jan 31, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@brancoder brancoder left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Base automatically changed from tooling-dashboard/add-partial-migration to develop February 4, 2025 15:53
cpl121
cpl121 suggested changes Feb 4, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@cpl121 cpl121 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

conflicts 🙏🏼

@vercel vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – rebased-explorer February 5, 2025 11:47 Inactive
@vercel vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – apps-backend February 5, 2025 11:47 Inactive
@cpl121 cpl121 merged commit 4e30b34 into develop Feb 5, 2025
34 checks passed
@cpl121 cpl121 deleted the tooling-dashboard/handle-max-timelock-objects branch February 5, 2025 13:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@brancoder brancoder brancoder approved these changes

@cpl121 cpl121 cpl121 approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
tooling Issues related to the Tooling team wallet-dashboard Issues related to the Wallet Dashboard dApp
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
4 participants
@panteleymonchuk @brancoder @cpl121 @iota-ci