On 6/20/2020 1:49 PM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
> On 6/20/20 8:50 AM, nch via agora-discussion wrote:
>> On 6/20/20 7:20 AM, Jason Cobb via agora-discussion wrote:
>>> This may be the programmer in me speaking, but I don't think it's a good
>>> idea to couple these two values together. I think it will be easier in
>>> the future if rules can look at whether a proposal is distributable vs
>>> whether it is eligible for rewards separately.
>> Can't they do so under this system? "ready" means distributable, but
>> "Ready Method is Pended" means it's eligible for rewards. What's the
>> advantage of separating it?
>>
>
> G. recently mentioned urgent proposals, so I'll use that as an example.
> Imagine we wanted to add a different method of pending that also changed
> how the proposal behaved in some other way. If we keep pending &
> eligibility separate, we don't have to update the central definition of
> eligibility since the new method could just flip a switch from eligible
> to ineligible (or vice-versa).
>
> Also, I'm not saying keeping them together is a horrible idea - the
> proposal looks fine and it will probably work just fine for now. I just
> think separating them might make our lives slightly easier in the future.
How about defining "pending" as a continual state evaluation not a switch?
E.g. "A proposal is pending if any of the following are true:
- Its foo switch is set to X;
- Its bar switch is set to W;
- etc."
then we can just add to the list.
