In the current version we have limited number of Stakers. As we discussed with @ksridharbabuus here: https://github.com/ksridharbabuus/RFAI-Contracts/issues/2 there is a solution with unlimited number of Stakers, however @ksridharbabuus criticized it.
Nevertheless I've demonstrated that:
We can have infinite number of stakers
We can fully simulate the current design on the client side (with exception of settleFundsAndChangeStatus, so stakers will need to claim funds by themselves after rejectRequest and closeRequest)
I do agree that if we don't need unlimited number of stackers (or we want automatically redistribute funds back after rejectRequest or closeRequest which would be impossible with proposed unlimited Stakers solution) it is not an issue.
Godaiandi
commented
1 year ago
In the current version we have limited number of Stakers. As we discussed with @ksridharbabuus here: https://github.com/ksridharbabuus/RFAI-Contracts/issues/2 there is a solution with unlimited number of Stakers, however @ksridharbabuus criticized it. Nevertheless I've demonstrated that:
We can have infinite number of stakers
We can fully simulate the current design on the client side (with exception of
settleFundsAndChangeStatus, so stakers will need to claim funds by themselves afterrejectRequestandcloseRequest)I do agree that if we don't need unlimited number of stackers (or we want automatically redistribute funds back after
rejectRequestorcloseRequestwhich would be impossible with proposed unlimited Stakers solution) it is not an issue.