You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As of now, there is no standard contract API for the rln membership contract. There are currently two interfaces defined that live in two different GH repos that have discrepancies. Given that the rln RFC lives in vac repo, it makes sense for us to take the first step and provide a consolidated and standard interfcace for that. Hopefully, after that, we can conduct more structural and deliberate research on the contract w.r.t. security, multi-chain support, adding fee option, and ultimately shape it towards becoming a DAO (perhaps).
As part of this issue:
A raw RFC for the rln-relay contract should be compiled (and added to https://rfc.vac.dev/spec), in which all the function calls are described with their objectives. The content can be formatted similar to the ERC20 token API https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-20 (but of course, it should comply with the typical format Vac RFCs as well).
Reference Issue: vacp2p/rfc#511
Author: staheri14
As of now, there is no standard contract API for the rln membership contract. There are currently two interfaces defined that live in two different GH repos that have discrepancies. Given that the rln RFC lives in vac repo, it makes sense for us to take the first step and provide a consolidated and standard interfcace for that. Hopefully, after that, we can conduct more structural and deliberate research on the contract w.r.t. security, multi-chain support, adding fee option, and ultimately shape it towards becoming a DAO (perhaps).
As part of this issue:
Resources
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: