Closed oldchili closed 7 months ago
IMO regardless we have a special function for exiting without fee or not, the migration logic would be better fully happening in the migrator contract and it should just be an authed contract in the lockstake + needing a
hope
from the user to be able to pull from theurn
.
Right, that's better. Changed.
Coverage of freeNoFee
access control:
1) authed - no, owner - no, can - no - x, covered by authedMethods (1st check) 2) authed - no, owner - no, can - yes - x, covered by authedMethods (1st check) 3) authed - no, owner - yes, can - no - x, covered by authedMethods (1st check) 4) authed - no, owner - yes, can - yes - x, covered by authedMethods (1st check) 5) authed - yes, owner - no, can - no - x, covered by authedMethods (3rd check) 6) authed - yes, owner - no, can - yes - v, covered by testHopeNope 7) authed - yes, owner - yes , can - no - v, covered by testFreeNoFee 8) authed - yes, owner - yes , can - yes - v, covered by (6) and (7)
IMO regardless we have a special function for exiting without fee or not, the migration logic would be better fully happening in the migrator contract and it should just be an authed contract in the lockstake + needing a
hope
from the user to be able to pull from theurn
.