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 we decide that the Gateway contract should stay minimal, then I propose we rename the current Gateway to GatewayInternal or something, and make the actual Gateway in front of it.
If we position the Gateway contract as the single entry point to ZetaChain, we need to make sure it can additional seemingly non-core functionality like storing contract addresses and reporting gas.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Can you provide the extended interface you would consider for the gateway on top of withdraw/deposit/call methods?
I would personally avoid having several gateway contract types.
If we decide that the Gateway contract should stay minimal, then I propose we rename the current Gateway to GatewayInternal or something, and make the actual Gateway in front of it.
If we position the Gateway contract as the single entry point to ZetaChain, we need to make sure it can additional seemingly non-core functionality like storing contract addresses and reporting gas.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: