Closed petrovska-petro closed 5 months ago
something i found tricky while coding the script is to not count for the fees collected while handling a mint
afterwards. if while reviewing you find that optimisation to be more precise on the each mint
, specially w/ focus on the active range. feel free to directly push the commit, since its relatively time sensitive for incoming signing session
discrepancy should be minimal in general terms, but ID 255188
has almost ~$20k of uncollected fees so may make a slightly difference
something i found tricky while coding the script is to not count for the fees collected while handling a
mint
afterwards. if while reviewing you find that optimisation to be more precise on the eachmint
, specially w/ focus on the active range. feel free to directly push the commit, since its relatively time sensitive for incoming signing sessiondiscrepancy should be minimal in general terms, but ID
255188
has almost ~$20k of uncollected fees so may make a slightly difference
Ah, @petrovska-petro, just realized that the fees issue was acknowledged. Hopefully my fix seems reasonable to you.
appreciated the thoughtful review @sajanrajdev & @wtj2021 . your additions looks go to me to be more precise and not to account for the collected fees. good one on the events ðŸ§
the discrepancy for BADGER
amount you highlighted ill attach to the slipp as well of some of the positions created and how some bits of liquidity did not managed to fit in properly, that's why was forced to add as well the approve(0)
at some point
in the grant schemes of things is $14k compare to the amounts migrated is relatively nothing. lets merge it and post it ! 🚀
tackles #1545
run: