Sm 352 seeker staking #172
Conversation
Nick95550
force-pushed
the
SM-352-seeker-staking
branch
from
dadef6a to
3b38c2e
Compare
| StakedErrors err = _isSeekerStakedError(node, seeker.seekerId); | ||
| if (err == StakedErrors.NIL) { | ||
| _unstakeSeeker(node, seeker.seekerId); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, I dont think we should auto unstake for them. They should do this themselves, or just transfer the seeker ownership. This code needs a comment to warn users, here or in the @notice comment. But I think we should just revert here instead of auto unstake for the user. It makes the code clearer and be strict for what it should do. What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I actually did this on Johns recommendation, I think I tend to agree with your pov though. #172 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think the user should have to unstake then stake again (2 transactions) just to move their staked seeker.
I agree that the @notice comment should mention that it will unstake the seeker if it is already staked.
Implements the interface and contract for Seeker Staking.