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
If a Safe uses a threshold of 1 and I'm executing as an owner of the Safe, atm the transaction will only be signed and proposed via the transaction service. It should actually be directly executed in that case, though.
ser-kit actually already covers this logic but relies on the Safe waypoint's threshold field for that. We don't provide this field in our manually created routes.
We should get rid of the legacy connection migration functions and directly operate on the new routes model. This allows us to populate the threshold field once the user enters a Safe address and we fetch the Safe info.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
If a Safe uses a threshold of 1 and I'm executing as an owner of the Safe, atm the transaction will only be signed and proposed via the transaction service. It should actually be directly executed in that case, though.
ser-kit actually already covers this logic but relies on the Safe waypoint's
threshold
field for that. We don't provide this field in our manually created routes.We should get rid of the legacy connection migration functions and directly operate on the new routes model. This allows us to populate the
threshold
field once the user enters a Safe address and we fetch the Safe info.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: