seaport proposal type #30
Conversation
|
| @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ import "../tokens/IERC721.sol"; | |||
| import "./PartyGovernance.sol"; | |||
|
|
|||
| // ERC721 functionality built on top of PartyGovernance. | |||
| // TODO: Just inherit from solmate? 🙄 | |||
| @@ -57,6 +58,21 @@ contract PartyGovernanceNFT is | |||
| _; | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| modifier mustOwnTokenOrIsApprovedForAll(uint256 tokenId, address whom) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
def feels like we should just inherit from sol-mate instead of writing this stuff ourselves
| @@ -1,14 +1,17 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
shall we just remove this now? and get rid of shared wyvern maker?
| uint256 expiry | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| ISeaportExchange public immutable SEAPORT; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we be able to support if seaport keeps the same ABI but upgrades to a new address?
also -- what happens if Seaport gets exploited? Should we have a multisig kill switch / escape hatch to disable OS interactions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
imo neither case is worth it. First seems unlikely without some breaking change, second only affects open listings. Also I kind of like that parties have to opt into something like using a new OpenSea version.
| ) { | ||
| // Not a unanimous vote and the token is precious, so list on zora | ||
| // AH first. | ||
| // TODO: Should this be just executionDelay? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it feels reasonable to me for this to be a diff concept than executionDelay
| return ""; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| function _listOnOpenSeaport( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
seaport is p clean to work with 🙏
| orderHash = _getOrderHash(orderParams); | ||
| // Validate the order on-chain so no signature is required to fill it. | ||
| assert(SEAPORT.validate(orders)); | ||
| emit OpenSeaportOrderListed( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nice. would like to use this to post this to their api on rinkeby
| offer.endAmount = 1; | ||
| } | ||
| // What we want for it. | ||
| orderParams.consideration = new ISeaportExchange.ConsiderationItem[](1); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think we need to create two considerations: one for us, and one for an OS fee. worried that they won't accept our order in their API or show it on their site w/o their 2.5% fee.
here's an example of the seaport order that was created for me via their testnet site: https://gist.github.com/steveklebanoff/32331eb2de985206ec7d2f61b814c0ed
| @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ import "../tokens/IERC721.sol"; | |||
| import "./PartyGovernance.sol"; | |||
|
|
|||
| // ERC721 functionality built on top of PartyGovernance. | |||
| // TODO: Just inherit from solmate? 🙄 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@merklejerk wdyt about just doing this now?
add openseaport integration test (WIP) separate zora timeout and duration
fix getProposalState() not recognizing unanimous state. allow extra seaport fees. fix tests, get bought seaport order integration test working refactors
| @@ -728,6 +723,10 @@ abstract contract PartyGovernance is | |||
| if (pv.passedTime + gv.executionDelay <= t) { | |||
| return ProposalState.Ready; | |||
| } | |||
| // If unanimous, we skip the execution delay. | |||
| if (_isUnanimousVotes(pv.votes, gv.totalVotingPower)) { | |||
* add `SellPartyCardsAuthority` * update deploy * add a few tests * update events and add helper functions * update relevant abis * fix tests * add more tests * add more tests * update `isSaleActive` logic * move Contributed event * merge `AboveMaximumContributionsError` and `BelowMinimumContributionsError` * remove redundant initial delegate check * fix compile errors * transfer contribution to Party and fix totalContribution * update `ContributionRouter` * fix `isSaleActive` * fix tests and increase coverage * fix test * update contribute event * fix event and tests * tweaks * increase coverage * perf: optimize and refactor `SellPartyCardsAuthority` (#30) * fix tests * update delegate comments * ensure contract is an authority before sale creation * fix deploy * emit `Finalized` if not enough room for another contribution * style: rename `delegate` to `initialDelegate` * fix(`SellPartyCardsAuthority`): mitigations (#329) * Fix merge conflict --------- Co-authored-by: Brian Le <[email protected]>
seaport listing proposal type