-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 403
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
feat: deploy pzEth staging #5079
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #5079 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 77.53% 77.53%
=======================================
Files 103 103
Lines 2110 2110
Branches 190 190
=======================================
Hits 1636 1636
Misses 453 453
Partials 21 21
|
…prod). Add pzEth getter" This reverts commit 2b36963.
// TODO DEPLOY REAL ONES | ||
const stagingSafes = { | ||
ethereum: '0xA9421c6F339eC414b7e77449986bE9C2Ae430C25', | ||
bsc: '0xA9421c6F339eC414b7e77449986bE9C2Ae430C25', | ||
arbitrum: '0xA9421c6F339eC414b7e77449986bE9C2Ae430C25', | ||
optimism: '0xA9421c6F339eC414b7e77449986bE9C2Ae430C25', | ||
blast: '0xA9421c6F339eC414b7e77449986bE9C2Ae430C25', | ||
linea: '0xA9421c6F339eC414b7e77449986bE9C2Ae430C25', | ||
base: '0xA9421c6F339eC414b7e77449986bE9C2Ae430C25', | ||
mode: '0xf40b75fb85C3bEc70D75A1B45ef08FC48Db61115', | ||
swell: '0xf40b75fb85C3bEc70D75A1B45ef08FC48Db61115', | ||
fraxtal: '0xf40b75fb85C3bEc70D75A1B45ef08FC48Db61115', | ||
zircuit: '0xf40b75fb85C3bEc70D75A1B45ef08FC48Db61115', | ||
}; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
maybe overly optimistic but I feel like we dont need to test with safes and fine to use the deployer key as owner?
const existingProxyAdmins: ChainMap<{ address: string; owner: string }> = { | ||
ethereum: { | ||
address: '0x4f4671Ce69c9af15e33eB7Cf6D1358d1B39Af3bF', | ||
owner: '0xD1e6626310fD54Eceb5b9a51dA2eC329D6D4B68A', | ||
}, | ||
zircuit: { | ||
address: '0x8b789B4A56675240c9f0985B467752b870c75711', | ||
owner: '0x8410927C286A38883BC23721e640F31D3E3E79F8', | ||
}, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why was this removed?
const tokenConfig = Object.fromEntries<HypTokenRouterConfig>( | ||
await Promise.all( | ||
chainsToDeploy.map( | ||
async (chain): Promise<[string, HypTokenRouterConfig]> => { | ||
const addresses = await registry.getChainAddresses(chain); | ||
assert(addresses, 'No addresses in Registry'); | ||
const { mailbox } = addresses; | ||
|
||
const mailboxContract = Mailbox__factory.connect( | ||
mailbox, | ||
multiProvider.getProvider(chain), | ||
); | ||
const defaultHook = await mailboxContract.defaultHook(); | ||
const ret: [string, HypTokenRouterConfig] = [ | ||
chain, | ||
{ | ||
isNft: false, | ||
type: | ||
chain === lockboxChain | ||
? TokenType.XERC20Lockbox | ||
: TokenType.XERC20, | ||
token: chain === lockboxChain ? lockbox : xERC20, | ||
owner: pzEthSafes[chain], | ||
gas: warpRouteOverheadGas, | ||
mailbox, | ||
interchainSecurityModule: { | ||
type: IsmType.AGGREGATION, | ||
threshold: 2, | ||
modules: [ | ||
{ | ||
type: IsmType.ROUTING, | ||
owner: pzEthSafes[chain], | ||
domains: buildAggregationIsmConfigs( | ||
chain, | ||
chainsToDeploy, | ||
pzEthValidators, | ||
), | ||
}, | ||
{ | ||
type: IsmType.FALLBACK_ROUTING, | ||
domains: {}, | ||
owner: pzEthSafes[chain], | ||
}, | ||
], | ||
}, | ||
hook: getRenzoHook(defaultHook, chain), | ||
proxyAdmin: existingProxyAdmins[chain], | ||
}, | ||
]; | ||
|
||
return ret; | ||
}, | ||
), | ||
), | ||
); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why is this changing so much?
can we have 1 PR just to setup staging with an identical config and a separate PR for value changes?
Description
Drive-by changes
Related issues
Backward compatibility
Testing