Consider removing ERC20VotesComp

[frangio]

We released ERC20VotesComp for users who needed compatibility with an existing GovernorAlpha/Bravo instance. For 5.0, I think we can remove this contract. Anyone who still needs this compatibility can remain on 4.x, but this seems in fact very rare: I can find 1.6k deployments of ERC20Votes but only 80 deployments of ERC20VotesComp. We should remove it from the "Compatibility" section in the Governance guide.

[frangio]

We should consider removing GovernorCompatibilityBravo and GovernorTimelockCompound as well.

[FriskyHamTitz]

Im using bravo compatibility but only that.

Instead of removing it maybe just move it to a folder called deprecated. It would be frustrating to have to be tied to separate versions of the packages just to implement contracts.

The existing contract is missing a few things which is maybe why it's use is limited because its not fully compatible with bravo. It maybe a good idea to have a fully compatible version, but if you don't feel like supporting maybe just put it in the deprecated folder like above

Things I noticed that were missing:

1. It's missing a few properties. Proposal count, a few others
2. There's no way to enumerate the hashes

Regardless it would be nice if all oz governance supported a way to obtain previous proposal without using the graph or enumerating blocks on the rpc.

[Amxx]

Done in #4276

[frangio]

@FriskyHamTitz Can you please elaborate a bit more on your use case. Are you interested in the actual Bravo compatibility or are you only interested in how it stores the proposal details in storage?

[FriskyHamTitz]

I was mostly interested in bravo comparability to reduce the time it takes to integrate into existing frontends like uniswap. Current integrations followed what I outlined, I had to write a module to convert the proposal count to it's original has etc and that helped speed up integration time. .

…

On Fri, Jun 9, 2023, 2:46 PM Francisco ***@***.***> wrote: @FriskyHamTitz <https://github.com/FriskyHamTitz> Can you please elaborate a bit more on your use case. Are you interested in the actual Bravo compatibility or are you only interested in how it stores the proposal details in storage? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3833 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AWT45KUSKJYAUPESKNE375TXKNVPHANCNFSM6AAAAAASK2JIDA> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>