b379e7467f
* Allow founders to transfer territories * Log territory transfers in new AuditLog table * Add territory transfer notifications * Use polymorphic AuditEvent table * Add setting for territory transfer notifications * Add push notification * Rename label from user to stacker * More space between cancel and confirm button * Remove AuditEvent table The audit table is not necessary for territory transfers and only adds complexity and unrelated discussion to this PR. Thinking about a future-proof schema for territory transfers and how/what to audit at the same time made my head spin. Some thoughts I had: 1. Maybe using polymorphism for an audit log / audit events is not a good idea Using polymorphism as is currently used in the code base (user wallets) means that every generic event must map to exactly one specialized event. Is this a good requirement/assumption? It already didn't work well for naive auditing of territory transfers since we want events to be indexable by user (no array column) so every event needs to point to a single user but a territory transfer involves multiple users. This made me wonder: Do we even need a table? Maybe the audit log for a user can be implemented using a view? This would also mean no data denormalization. 2. What to audit and how and why? Most actions are already tracked in some way by necessity: zaps, items, mutes, payments, ... In that case: what is the benefit of tracking these things individually in a separate table? Denormalize simply for convenience or performance? Why no view (see previous point)? Use case needs to be more clearly defined before speccing out a schema. * Fix territory transfer notification id conflict * Use include instead of two separate queries * Drop territory transfer setting * Remove trigger usage * Prevent transfers to yourself |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| lnd | ||
| models | ||
| resolvers | ||
| s3 | ||
| search | ||
| slack | ||
| typeDefs | ||
| webPush | ||
| package.json | ||
| ssrApollo.js | ||