| Report Date | 2024/10/02 |
| Submitted by | Ankan Anurag |
@ankan:parity.io16aQgRVKfD22NehdzZD2VPoenP2hvx8RS2gUirfk6abiCiesStakingContinuing from my previous evidence, my primary focus has been to enable nomination pool members to participate in OpenGov. While this is already live on westend, it was pending audits before it can be enabled in production. Since then, I have addressed various improvements and fixes raised during the audit process. These changes are included in the polkadot-sdk/stable2409 release and once Polkadot's runtime is upgraded to this version, over 24M DOTs owned by members of the pool will be eligible to participate in voting.
PR list: #4822, #4804, #4981, #4998, #4999.
However, these changes have the unintended consequence that a direct staker will not be able to participate in the pool anymore. The root cause is that pallet-staking uses locks (similar to freeze in the deprecated Currency trait) instead of holds. This is largely due to legacy code, and pallet-staking should ideally use holds. I also have a working PR to address this issue, which is currently awaiting review and audit.
Provide your voting record in relation to required thresholds for your rank.
| Ranks | Activity thresholds | Agreement thresholds | Member's voting activities | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | 90% | N/A | I have voted on 0 out of 1 referenda in the eligible period. |
Question(s):
Concern(s):
Comment(s):
Threshold
Going to vote AYE on this for sure, but still some feedback for the future:
I think instead of providing a list of PRs, it is better to only highlight the most impactful ones and explain why they are impactful. The nom pool voting definitely is a good example here.
Otherwise without context it is difficult to know what PRs of that list are actually impactful and which are not.