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

Upgrade Tapir contracts to be inline with mainnet #308

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Aug 27, 2024

Conversation

theref
Copy link
Contributor

@theref theref commented Aug 16, 2024

  • Deployment Scripts
  • Configuration Files
  • Deploy Contracts
  • Registries

@theref theref marked this pull request as draft August 16, 2024 09:40
Copy link
Member

@derekpierre derekpierre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Left some comments/suggestions.

It could be good to use lynx/bqeth.yml as an example for what tapir/bqeth.yml should look like.

scripts/tapir/deploy_free_fee_model.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
scripts/tapir/deploy_bqeth.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
deployment/constructor_params/tapir/free-fee-model.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
deployment/constructor_params/tapir/bqeth.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
deployment/constructor_params/tapir/bqeth.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
deployment/constructor_params/tapir/bqeth.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
deployment/constructor_params/tapir/bqeth.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
deployment/constructor_params/tapir/bqeth.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
deployment/constructor_params/tapir/bqeth.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
deployment/constructor_params/tapir/bqeth.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@derekpierre derekpierre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🎸

Copy link
Member

@derekpierre derekpierre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🎸

@derekpierre
Copy link
Member

derekpierre commented Aug 26, 2024

@theref two outstanding items that we should do before merging this PR:

  1. We have some conflicting formatting actions between the deployment code used to generate the registry, and the pre-commit linter. See Upgrade lynx Coordinator #312 (comment). For now let's keep the non-linter modified version so that the registry diff is easier to review.

Consequently can you run:

ape run normalize_registry --registry ./deployment/artifacts/tapir.json

to normalize the registry format back to what was produced by the deployment scripts. Then when committing the update to the format of the registry simply run:

git commit --no-verify

So that the automated linter doesn't update the format.

This is something that will be addressed in a separate issue/PR; filed #319 .

  1. Verify the BQeth Subscription contract on the polygon scan for Amoy. Have you used https://github.com/nucypher/nucypher-contracts-verification before for storing the solidity files used for verification? If you haven't before, ping me and we can go through it quickly.

@theref
Copy link
Contributor Author

theref commented Aug 27, 2024

@derekpierre derekpierre merged commit 38a2420 into nucypher:main Aug 27, 2024
2 checks passed
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.

3 participants