-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 43
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(mint
): add mint
module
#794
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #794 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 10.73% 10.65% -0.09%
===========================================
Files 286 302 +16
Lines 69593 72212 +2619
===========================================
+ Hits 7473 7693 +220
- Misses 61940 64333 +2393
- Partials 180 186 +6
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM staking rewards can be distributed
I would suggest setting params for the module in config.yml
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This and a minor lint issue need to be fixed imo. I can just push these minor changes.
Closes #780
Closes #781
What does this PR does?
Adds a forked version of the
mint
module.Unfortunately I could not fork the osmosis module since it depends on their epoch module, and so it was unfit.
I opted to start with the vanilla mint module as a baseline, with the dynamic inflation rate. In the future, we could explore some capping mechanism, for instance a reduction after a year worth of blocks as done in the juno
mint
module.The module distributes inflation to 3 parties:
incentive
modules (currently commented out inkeeper.go
)the idea is to send rewards directly to the
incentives
module account so that the module itself can handle the accumulated rewards independently.I have opted to not include at this time a "developers" rewards or "strategic reserve" rewards because this need to be thought out later. We could explore a similar design as per osmosis where a weighted list of addresses, that can be changed through governance, receive rewards from inflation. Not sure if doing this per-block is efficient though. Hence, leaving it aside.