Skip to content

Conversation

@hughescoin
Copy link
Contributor

What changed? Why?

  • Add FAQs for Builder Codes

Notes to reviewers

How has it been tested?

@cb-heimdall
Copy link
Collaborator

cb-heimdall commented Jan 28, 2026

✅ Heimdall Review Status

Requirement Status More Info
Reviews 1/1
Denominator calculation
Show calculation
1 if user is bot 0
1 if user is external 0
2 if repo is sensitive 0
From .codeflow.yml 1
Additional review requirements
Show calculation
Max 0
0
From CODEOWNERS 0
Global minimum 0
Max 1
1
1 if commit is unverified 0
Sum 1

### What are the benefits of supporting Builder Codes?

- **Rewards:** If your app drives transactions, Builder Codes let Base automatically attribute that usage back to you, unlocking rewards as our program expands.
- **Analytics:** Developers can reliably track onchain usage, user acquisition, and conversion metrics in Base.dev
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
- **Analytics:** Developers can reliably track onchain usage, user acquisition, and conversion metrics in Base.dev
- **Analytics:** Developers can reliably track onchain usage, user acquisition, and conversion metrics in Base.dev.


- Find your transaction hash
- View the input data field
- Verify the last 16 bytes are the ERC marker (`0x8021...8021`)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: Prefixing this with 0x might add a bit of confusion since the actual calldata will have other data before that. I would replace this with ...80218021 or something like that.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually, I think I'd just say something like "Verify that the last 16 bytes of data are 8021 repeating."

roethke
roethke previously approved these changes Jan 30, 2026
@cb-heimdall cb-heimdall dismissed roethke’s stale review January 30, 2026 23:44

Approved review 3730977415 from roethke is now dismissed due to new commit. Re-request for approval.

@hughescoin hughescoin merged commit d4c7abf into master Jan 31, 2026
8 checks passed
@hughescoin hughescoin deleted the pat/builder-code-faq branch January 31, 2026 00:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants