Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve pallet-bridge-relayers to support multiple bridges #7272

Closed
bkontur opened this issue Jan 21, 2025 · 0 comments · Fixed by #7492
Closed

Improve pallet-bridge-relayers to support multiple bridges #7272

bkontur opened this issue Jan 21, 2025 · 0 comments · Fixed by #7492

Comments

@bkontur
Copy link
Contributor

bkontur commented Jan 21, 2025

TBD:

github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 19, 2025
Closes: #7272
Relates to: #6578
Relates to: #7274

## Description

The PR enhances the `pallet-bridge-rewards` by making it generic over
the `RewardKind` type (previously hardcoded as `RewardsAccountParams`).
This modification allows the pallet to support multiple reward types
(e.g., P/K bridge, Snowbridge), increasing its flexibility and
applicability across various bridge scenarios.

Other pallets can register rewards using `bp_relayers::RewardLedger`,
which is implemented by the rewards pallet. The runtime can then be
configured with different mechanisms for paying/claiming rewards via
`bp_relayers::PaymentProcedure` (e.g., see the `pub struct
BridgeRewardPayer;` implementation for BridgeHubWestend).

## Follow-up  
The removed balances/rewards statistics from the complex relay (no
longer used) will eventually be reintroduced or fixed in the standalone
relayers via
paritytech/parity-bridges-common#3004 (comment).

---------

Co-authored-by: cmd[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Francisco Aguirre <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Serban Iorga <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant