Show tx signer

[selankon]

Fix #116

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed on https://6740734f45d8ec6c580155f5--vocdoni-explorer-stg.netlify.app

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed on https://674073547660628305d73501--vocdoni-explorer-dev.netlify.app

[emmdim]

LGTM

[elboletaire]

But... the signer is not the account, is it? I don't see how useful is this, since copying a signer does not allow to search an account by such address (?)

[emmdim]

But... the signer is not the account, is it? I don't see how useful is this, since copying a signer does not allow to search an account by such address (?)

At least in the raw of the vocdoni-node the name used for the account is signer.
Example:
https://dev.explorer.vote/transactions/660284/0/1

Is that what you mean?

[elboletaire]

But... the signer is not the account, is it? I don't see how useful is this, since copying a signer does not allow to search an account by such address (?)

At least in the raw of the vocdoni-node the name used for the account is signer. Example: dev.explorer.vote/transactions/660284/0/1

Is that what you mean?

What I mean is... what is that signer useful for if it's not the actual account?

[elboletaire]

I approved the changes, but my confusion with the signer comes due to the create_account transactions, where the signer is the account of the wallet who created such account.

But in these transactions, an account field is added, which shows the account recently created. May be a good idea to show it somehow, although may be done in a different PR (as you wish @selankon).

[elboletaire]

I've changed my mind. You're pointing to a PR which added a new field account, but you're using a field named signer. You should do a ternary operation, and show the account by default, or the signer in case there's no account.

Never mind that last thought... I got really confused due to the vocdoni-node PR related to this one and different naming issues.

The only required change in this PR is not naming it signer, since they'll be always existing accounts and naming it signer adds confusion (since we now can name them accounts, organizations and adding signer would complicate things for end-users [as it did to me today, damn dyslexics]).

[selankon]

The only required change in this PR is not naming it signer, since they'll be always existing accounts and naming it signer adds confusion (since we now can name them accounts, organizations and adding signer would complicate things for end-users [as it did to me today, damn dyslexics]).

So which name should I use? Account?

[elboletaire]

So which name should I use? Account?

Yeah, @emmdim agreed