[nato-uniswapv3-voting] TheNationToken PR #1391
Conversation
…x to upstream; re-add nato-uniswap-v3 registration
✅ Updated examples.json exactly to match the style in the reference example (erc20-balance-of). Added network as a top-level param. Structure now identical to what reviewer requested. Please re-run the workflow when possible 🙏
|
Hi @ChaituVR, Please check our PR here. |
|
Hi @ChaituVR Is there any update? |
|
Hi @ChaituVR . Please check and approve our PR. |
|
Hi @ChaituVR , everything is good now? |
| export const author = 'vitalii'; | ||
| export const version = '0.1.0'; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| export const author = 'vitalii'; | |
| export const version = '0.1.0'; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"author": "TheNationToken", this is correct one
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @ChaituVR, the last time, you want me to change it to "TheNationToken"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It was on different file https://github.com/snapshot-labs/score-api/pull/1391/files#diff-4328882fcad6ddbe8bddf7c676eff45bafb96319570bdaa4d415c6686dd3d765R3
Can remove from here
| try { | ||
| rawData = await subgraphRequest( | ||
| options.subgraph || UNISWAP_V3_SUBGRAPH_URL[network], | ||
| params | ||
| ); | ||
| } catch (error) { | ||
| console.error('Subgraph request failed:', error); | ||
| // Return zero scores for all addresses if subgraph fails | ||
| return Object.fromEntries(addresses.map(address => [address, 0])); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @Monarch717 adding a try catch can cause wrong voting power even if there is a network issue
| try { | |
| rawData = await subgraphRequest( | |
| options.subgraph || UNISWAP_V3_SUBGRAPH_URL[network], | |
| params | |
| ); | |
| } catch (error) { | |
| console.error('Subgraph request failed:', error); | |
| // Return zero scores for all addresses if subgraph fails | |
| return Object.fromEntries(addresses.map(address => [address, 0])); | |
| } | |
| rawData = await subgraphRequest( | |
| options.subgraph || UNISWAP_V3_SUBGRAPH_URL[network], | |
| params | |
| ); |
The correct solution is to deploy a new subgraph on base network
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @ChaituVR , Do you want me to deploy our own subgraph?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think thats the best solution considering the issue with current subgraph
3 participants
Fixed type issues and testing passed