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

Missing TX View Features #1076

Open
Ncookiez opened this issue Oct 21, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

Missing TX View Features #1076

Ncookiez opened this issue Oct 21, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
feedback Improvements proposed

Comments

@Ncookiez
Copy link
Contributor

I appreciate the minimalism in the transaction view (where a transaction is displayed to the user for them to sign), but the lack of features there does make some transactions difficult or outright impossible. These could be hidden away on a dropdown, hotkey or gear icon somewhere, but they should be there.

I'll list a few here but if others have more suggestions I'm happy to add them to the list:

Viewing Approval Amount

Currently I do not know if a dapp prompted me to approve an exact amount of tokens, infinite amount or a 0 amount (to revoke approval). The function name is displayed, but that's it. Some of the blame here should be shifted to bad dapp design, but still - we should be able to see that, with bonus points for being able to edit the amount :)

Current View:
image

It should also be possible to display what token is being approved, for what address, and if using something like Permit2 with an expiry, when it is valid until.

Editing Gas Limit

Estimating gas limits is hard. I know. In general I'd be OK with the wallet largely overestimating this to avoid running into "out of gas" reverts, but ultimately we need a way to set this ourselves. For example, this TX ran out of gas with ~170k estimated and I had to resubmit it with a higher gas limit to get it through (had to use another wallet in order to do this). Went through here with ~198k.

Similarly to the previous point, we should be able to see what the value is currently set at, and edit it if necessary. Most users should not care about this or need this, but the feature should be hidden away somewhere for those that do.

@DanielSinclair
Copy link
Contributor

@Ncookiez Thank you for your feedback!

  • We will start looking at the Approval problem, and make some improvements there. You will also start to see more rich data when we roll out transaction simulation in the coming weeks.
  • Manual gas overrides for all transactions is something we'd like to start working on. Do you enjoy using our interface in the Send flow? Are you missing any features here? Screenshot 2023-10-23 at 1 01 22 PM

@DanielSinclair DanielSinclair added the feedback Improvements proposed label Oct 23, 2023
@Ncookiez
Copy link
Contributor Author

Do you enjoy using our interface in the Send flow? Are you missing any features here?

I really like it! For something like a simple transfer event there's really no need to shift gas limits, so I understand the choices made there. I wish it was available in more networks though, as I'm not seeing that view on Optimism or Arbitrum. Also, the "Review" button seems to remain greyed out even when usable on those networks.

I especially like how you can resolve and send to any ENS address without needing to explicitly be on or select mainnet unlike some other wallets out there :3

@tomasmcm
Copy link

+1 on this one. This is the main issue preventing me from using and recommending rainbow as a replacement for metamask / rabby / others.

@Ncookiez
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ncookiez commented Nov 22, 2023

  • You will also start to see more rich data when we roll out transaction simulation in the coming weeks.

Just want to give props to the team for this one - just seen it live on my end and it's great.

image
image

Editing the approval amount would be great, but at least knowing if a dapp is prompting me with an infinite or exact approval is a huge upgrade.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feedback Improvements proposed
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants