| Report Date | Date of submission (2024/10/1) |
| Submitted by | Damilare Akinlose |
@dharjeezy/:matrix.org12GyGD3QhT4i2JJpNzvMf96sxxBLWymz4RdGCxRH5Rj5agKW12024-04-292024-07-01FRAME & RuntimeI discussed about how to ensure that pallet MQ message processing is transactional and I also implemented the enforcement of transactional processing to Pallet MQ message processing.
I also had to refactor what I did before when I introduced a new extrinsic for full unbonding in pallet staking, but it was later advised that instead of introducing a new extrinsic, it will make sense to actually support chilling first when a user calls unbond to unbond all amount staked. You can find details of the implementation here.
I added a new invariant try state check in the nomination-pools pallet for checking that a pool's point can never be lower than the stake in the same pool.
I implemented a different way of constructing genesis config values for all runtimes, how it was previously done is by using json, this newer implementation made use of
the RuntimeGenesisConfig instead.
I also included events to be emitted for voting and removal of vote in conviction pallet.
I also worked on invariants try state checks for the membership pallet.
I am currently working on adding various invariant try state checks for the democracy pallet.
I believe my contributions to the Polkadot ecosystem this past reporting period has been vital and are in cognisance to what the Technical Fellowship upholds for a Rank I member. I am also thankful and grateful to the insights and counsel given me by the higher ranks and co-rank member of the Fellowship which has enabled me to be active and being a member of the Fellowship.
| Ranks | Activity thresholds | Agreement thresholds | Member's voting activities | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | 90% | N/A | I have voted on 0 out of 2 referenda, during this period, I really did not pay attention to them | I'd do better on looking out for proposals under my track and vote accordingly. |
| II | 80% | N/A | ||
| III | 70% | 100% | ||
| IV | 60% | 90% | ||
| V | 50% | 80% | ||
| VI | 40% | 70% |
Question(s):
Concern(s):
Comment(s):
Threshold
I think the evidence could make a bit stronger argument on why your contributions are valuable for Polkadot. The first one seems obvious, but putting it more into perspective helps the other fellows who review to understand it better.