[Phase-2][Signalling] UIP-2: Adding EIP-2612 permit function to UBI

Universal Basic Income
1 
UIP: 2
title: Adding EIP-2612 permit function to UBI
author: @donosonaumczuk
status: Phase 2
created: 2021-08-27
conflicts with: None
languages: EN ES

About the proposal

UIP-2 proposes to add permit function as defined at EIP-2612 allowing users to approve transfering their UBIs to another address (user or contract) in a gasless way.

Complete proposal could be found here.

About the voting

You can find the voting snapshot here. It will be active from September 2nd to September 10th. The idea was to let the voting last a week, but an extra day was added to be fair with all time zones.

You must choose between Move UIP-2 to Phase-3 and Reject UIP-2.

In case you choose to move to Phase-3, current implementation will be deployed to a testnet where you could test it.

3 Likes
2

I’m trying to vote but the snapshot says pending :frowning:

3

Yes, that’s because voting starts tomorrow. Sorry if was confusing, I let one day between the announcing and the start.

1 Like
4

Should this be moved to Phase 3?
It’ has 2.k+ votes on YES and 0 on NO

3 Likes
5

Concuerdo. Debería pasar a fase 3!

6

A comment about this UIP: the language and the structure of this proposal does not follow HIP 5 standards, which inherits. Also, the language and explanation in lay terms is lacking. I’ve seen that there is a phase-1 version. I suggest bringing that structure for phase-3. A diagram of the permit process would be very beneficial to get the message through.

1 Like
7

Hey @ludovico would you be willing to help @donosonaumczuk redact the proposal ?

Would be great to have this feature on UBIv2 and definitely would help to have someone help that has the current Proposals framework clear.

1 Like
8

Didn’t notice HIP-5. Just tried to be as clear as possible in Phase-1, then avoid being redundant on Phase-2 (adding link to Phase-1 for details).

9

I’m going to craft the Phase-3 snapshot voting. Also, I will solve conflicts between implementation branch and master to include all changes and be ready for testnet deployments.

1 Like
10

I can help, for sure.
It needs to be in HIP 5 standards to become binding, so phase 2 needs to take phase 1 text and adapt it, and the final text with amendments from phase 2 (not phase 1) can go to phase 3.
Not complying with hip 5 removes the binding power of the proposal (devil’s advocate role here).
You could start by editing this post with as much of what phase 1 text survived.

1 Like
11

For some reason I can’t edit this proposal. Maybe editions are only enabled for some time period since publish date. I will need to create a new entry for Phase-3.

Master branch containing streaming features had been merged into UIP-2 implementation branch, so code it’s up to date again (: