fix: distinguish explicit vs implicit delegation permission revocation for Intents#2661
Merged
JoeCap08055 merged 11 commits intomainfrom Jan 8, 2026
Merged
Conversation
JoeCap08055
commented
Jan 5, 2026
Comment on lines
+97
to
+100
| /// Block number when the permission was/will be EFFECTIVELY revoked, taking into consideration the overall provider delegation revocation. | ||
| pub revoked_at: BlockNumber, | ||
| /// Block number the permission was/will be explicitly revoked (i.e., not implicitly revoked by a top-level revocation) (0 = not revoked) | ||
| pub explicit_revoked_at: BlockNumber, |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Opted to add new explicit_revoked_at instead of effective_revoked_at, because revoked_at in this context has historically ALWAYS meant the effective revocation block.
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
shannonwells
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2026
Collaborator
shannonwells
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good, ship it!
aramikm
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2026
Collaborator
aramikm
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approving, added a few comment just to make sure.
…ot just the list of delegated schemas
aramikm
reviewed
Jan 7, 2026
shannonwells
approved these changes
Jan 7, 2026
Collaborator
shannonwells
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approving, though reading through the tests to understand what you did, is making me rethink creating a bunch of setup at the very top of a long test file since I completely lose context in a diff, especially for a test file I'm unfamiliar with. Anyway, not for this PR, but food for thought.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
This PR does the following:
revoked_atblock number to the overallDelegationResponse, indicating the revocation of the overall Provider relationship, rather than individual Intent(s)explicit_revoked_atblock number toDelegationResponsefor each delegated Intent; the existingrevoked_atmaintains its original meaning of the earlier of the Intent or overall Delegation revocation block.get_granted_intents_by_msa_idtoget_delegation_for_msa_and_provider, to provide a stable method for obtaining an entire delegation rather than just the list of delegated intents. Previously getting the entire delegation would have required a direct storage query, or retrieving ALL delegations. As this was a recently-added API method, the only downstream effect is internal, as it had not been deployed yet.Goal
Closes #2660
Checklist