-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
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: rewards overhaul #1876
feat: rewards overhaul #1876
Conversation
b80fa7a
to
e762b05
Compare
- `rewards.vesting.baseRate`: the proportion of rewards in a vesting account which are vested each epoch | ||
- `rewards.vesting.minimumTransfer`: the minimum amount (expressed in quantum) which can be vested each epoch |
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.
Could we specify the default values for these in the specs?
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.
Sure @barnabee to confirm these are sensible but for now have set
rewards.vesting.baseRate=0.1
(means ~50% of rewards are unlocked after 7 epochs and ~95% after 31 epochs)rewards.vesting.minimumTransfer=100
(same as the minimum transfer network parameter).
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.
The minimum transfer means that someone with 1000 of rewards will be fully unlocked after 10 epochs regardless of the baserate. That seems too high.
Additionally I think the base rate ought to suggest unlocking over months rather than days for anyone with non-trivial rewards.
I think the minimum transfer amount should be something like 5 or 10, and the base rate probably in the range 1–2.5%.
However, I think this one we need to discuss with @MM0819 and Steven so lets hold off on confirming anything until that is done.
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.
@cdummett - can we add some sensible values to both this and the spreadsheet and these will be used. A core isue to be raised to update once the real values have ben decided
0be493b
to
a770146
Compare
1f72ef0
to
51a9159
Compare
72c8996
to
4b5c32b
Compare
4b5c32b
to
25e87fa
Compare
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.
Looks basically fine, but I've left a couple of tiny comments.
It needs review from Lewis and Steven as they're the ones who have the best picture of how this functionality will be used.
Co-authored-by: David Siska <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: David Siska <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Barnaby M <[email protected]>
0e53de0
to
4e8202b
Compare
PR updates the rewards specification with updates defined in the requirements document.