1️⃣ One Token Model - New Pallet Proxy Bonding

[JuaniRios]

What?

• Make it possible for users of the funding pallet to avoid having to bond PLMC when participating, and instead pay a fee to have the treasury bond its own PLMC

Why?

• Participants no longer need to hold any PLMC to participate, especially if we allow paying extrinsics with USDT/C/DOT
• Better UI/UX

How?

• Add a new pallet called proxy-bonding.
• This pallet exposes a function called bond_on_behalf_of which takes the account, bond amount, fee asset id, derivation path (project id), and the hold reason.
  • The function does a transfer_on_hold of the bond amount from the treasury, into a sub account generated using the derivation path, and pays the fee from the account to the sub_account,.
• A function called set_release_type decides whether the the fee will go to the configured fee recipient, or will be refunded. Also decides if the bond can be immediately send back to the treasury, or after a set block
• A function refund_fee refunds the fee of a certain user/bond if the release type was configured as refunded.
• An extrinsic transfer_bonds_back_to_treasury does what the name entails, and checks the release type for when it can be done successfully
• An extrinsic transfer_fees_to_recipient does what the name entails, only if the release type is Locked(n) and not Refunded

Testing?

One for each release type.

Anything Else?

If the design is approved by the reviewers, I can include the integration tests in a separate PR after this.

[JuaniRios]

• 💥 Switch to MultiLocation in the SignedExtension #406 : 2 dependent PRs (#407 , #408 )
• ✅ New e2e tests #405
• 🧪 Test USDT transaction payment #404
• 💸 USDT transaction payments #403
• 🧪 One Token Model - Pallet Funding Tests #402
• 🤝 One Token Model - Pallet Funding Integration #401
• 1️⃣ One Token Model - New Pallet Proxy Bonding #399 👈
• main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

Join @JuaniRios and the rest of your teammates on Graphite

[lrazovic]

Few nits here and there, but the logic looks good and aligns with what we discussed. Just a few minor issues to iron out. I'll approve this once we have some integration tests in place to verify it works as expected on our runtime.

[vstam1]

Think logic looks good. Couple of comments, but can be merged once comments are addressed

[JuaniRios]

Merge activity

• Oct 10, 10:08 AM EDT: A user started a stack merge that includes this pull request via Graphite.
• Oct 10, 10:08 AM EDT: A user merged this pull request with Graphite.