Closed peetzweg closed 1 year ago
Stash needs to be funded before the ownership is transferred to multisig
hmm, weird that replaceDelegates
doesn't fail then. have you tried with just ED or more? will this be done in the pattern or should we batch it with the pureProxy creation?
It does fail. We just don't handle it in the ui yet. Haven't done any error handling as I had no clue how to do it with capi just yet.
Can adapt the multisig creation first thing tomorrow. 👍
does it? it has always worked for me whenever I inspected the blocks. https://westend.subscan.io/block/0xe5f4550ef46c9f17735c7b71f88169108063548a4919f967404d2d204cf48cc7?tab=event
if you click on it it will show as insufficient balance failed
the calls inside the batch call suceeded but the batchAll call failed because no funds to pay
@peetzweg the latest notification PR does some kind of error handling.
adding .unhandleFailed
on the Rune makes it throw the actual chain error error you can catch. but doesn't work for failed batched transactions
maybe the multisig account needs some funds too or maybe the balance conversion (in the app) is wrong. just filled my accounts with Westies, there are funds
201 implemented the ability to iniate a simple transfer of tokens from the multisigs stash to a given address. It also added the ability to "ratify" this call from other members of the multisig. Everything seems to work fine. However, once the threshold is reach and the actual initiated call gets submitted and finalized on chain, the extrinsic fails with this error message:
Example Block including such extrinsic https://westend.subscan.io/block/0x1e8f265f26e0be46cbe8fb7e26316886863a1bbc462ec9be78024f620e519829
The actual
call
which is suggested to the multisig is crafted here: https://github.com/paritytech/capi-multisig-app/blob/adc8e045f779da8297118a77cd066563a9ccf507/www/src/components/wizards/transaction/Sign.tsx#L36-L62Which is an adapted version of the demo code ryan wrote here: https://github.com/paritytech/capi-multisig-app/pull/181/files#diff-48a207189b06f0a62ab05a05f02a5f3259b1e28254666b61a078422dde2a1d24R37-R52
It seems to me at least that there is something wrong in the structure of this call and or capi is not doing what we expect it to do.