Report Date | 2025/08/25 |
Submitted by | Daniel Shiposha |
@mrshiposha:matrix.org
14aC2hfNZTX4sMHPh47MjGB4Vr4rVYHZgBid54vRKrZVBZQY
During the reporting period:
I identified an AHM-related issue with pallet-xcm's transfer_assets extrinsic: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/9054. The issue breaks XCM transfers of DOT in some cases after AHM. NOTE: formally, this falls into the previous report period, though the previous retention argument was submitted before this issue was identified.
The XCM NFT PR with the new XCM adapters that use granular NFT traits was merged: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/4300. The new adapters are used in Westend Asset Hub in place of the old ones for pallet-uniques tokens.
UniqueInstancesAdapter
and UniqueInstancesDepositAdapter
) essentially supersede the old ones, NonFungibleAdapter
and NonFungiblesAdapter
.
The old adapters use one of the two old NFT trait sets. Despite being in frame-support, the said traits are mostly related to pallet-uniques. Even inside FRAME, we have another NFT pallet, pallet-nfts, that doesn't use them and can't be used with the old adapters (also, it has a bit different NFT destruction logic, so there is no correct way to use the old adapter with this pallet, even if the said traits were implemented for it).
Some time ago, new NFT traits were introduced that addressed the limitations and design issues of the old trait sets (see https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/5620, "Design Issues" section),
The new XCM NFT adapters use this improved interface (which is granular and extendable by design). They can be implemented for any NFT solution. Consequently, any NFT solution can be coupled with the new XCM NFT adapters.I opened a PR with the implementation of new NFT traits for pallet-nfts: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/9537. The previous PRs implemented them for pallet-uniques only. This PR also:
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 | There were no referenda I was eligible to vote on. | |
II | 80% | N/A | ||
III | 70% | 100% | ||
IV | 60% | 90% | ||
V | 50% | 80% | ||
VI | 40% | 70% |
Threshold