Closed Gnappuraz closed 5 years ago
Why this simple change cannot go to the #1051?
I mean, I don't see a rationale to isolate these 10-lines changes in a separate commit and mark it as a "feature". This label in my opinion should be applicable for high-level (business) features only.
@frolosofsky I don't see a rationale also why not to do it, is a simple interface extension with the rationale of being used in a following PR (not dead code). As for the label, if you have a better one I'm happy to change. I agree that is not a feature, maybe we can add a logging
label? This would go there since is the reason what it has been introduced.
@frolosofsky I don't see a rationale also why not to do it, is a simple interface extension with the rationale of being used in a following PR (not dead code). As for the label, if you have a better one I'm happy to change. I agree that is not a feature, maybe we can add a
logging
label? This would go there since is the reason what it has been introduced.
yep, maybe we should use the "logging" label instead of "feature".
This PR adds a new method
GetName()
tostaking::StakingWallet
. This is a prerequisite to https://github.com/dtr-org/unit-e/pull/1051. The main reason is that is convenient to have a label attached to each wallet so that we can distinguish between them while logging/debugging.