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

docs(update): remove mantis legacy tokenomics #4497

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 14, 2024
Merged

docs(update): remove mantis legacy tokenomics #4497

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 14, 2024

Conversation

JafarAz
Copy link
Collaborator

@JafarAz JafarAz commented Jun 13, 2024

Required for merge:

  • pr-workflow-check / draft-release-check is ✅ success
  • Other rules GitHub shows you, or can be read in configuration

Makes review faster:

  • PR title is my best effort to provide summary of changes and has clear text to be part of release notes
  • I marked PR by misc label if it should not be in release notes
  • Linked Zenhub/Github/Slack/etc reference if one exists
  • I was clear on what type of deployment required to release my changes (node, runtime, contract, indexer, on chain operation, frontend, infrastructure) if any in PR title or description
  • Added reviewer into Reviewers
  • I tagged(@) or used other form of notification of one person who I think can handle best review of this PR
  • I have proved that PR has no general regressions of relevant features and processes required to release into production
  • Any dependency updates made, was done according guides from relevant dependency
  • Clicking all checkboxes
  • Adding detailed description of changes when it feels appropriate (for example when PR is big)

@Ciejo Ciejo merged commit 10af4a6 into main Jun 14, 2024
20 of 23 checks passed
@Ciejo Ciejo deleted the edit-tokenomics branch June 14, 2024 16:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants