[Closed in favour of !2639] Draft: NodeOperatorRewards
[Closed in favour of !2639 (merged)]
[Aimed for V103.]
An alternative approach to !2639 (merged), noting the greater number of places that need to be altered.
**Draft:**
- The question remains of how slashing should be handled (in terms of decrementing NodeOperatorRewards or not, and how if so).
- I'm currently contemplating how
NewBondProviders
sets NodeOperatorFee to cosmos.ZeroUint(),
and how/whether doing so for NodeOperatorRewards would cause consensus failure,
and how trying aSafeSub
with an unset NodeOperatorRewards causes aPanic: runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference
error.
Edited by Multipartite