feat: support zkSyncEra and zkSyndTestnet chains #1259
Conversation
github-actions
bot
requested review from
alexandre-abrioux,
benjlevesque,
kevindavee and
yomarion
KolevDarko
changed the title
KolevDarko
requested review from
MantisClone and
leoslr
and removed request for
kevindavee and
yomarion
@benjlevesque I was also hesitant to create a completely new folder just for this specific chain, but their hardhat deploy plugin has the /deploy name hardcoded 😢 it's here I'll add a zkSync section to the README. I don't know where else to explain this? |
|
Changes unknown |
| @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ describe('erc777-stream', () => { | |||
| it.each([ | |||
| { network: 'goerli' }, | |||
| { network: 'matic' }, | |||
| { network: 'xdai' }, | |||
| // { network: 'xdai' }, | |||
| // An example of a basic deploy script | ||
| // It will deploy a Greeter contract to selected network | ||
| // as well as verify it on Block Explorer if possible for the network |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| // An example of a basic deploy script | |
| // It will deploy a Greeter contract to selected network | |
| // as well as verify it on Block Explorer if possible for the network |
| @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ | |||
| import { deployContract } from './utils-zk'; | |||
|
|
|||
| // An example of a basic deploy script | |||
|
|
||
| config(); | ||
|
|
||
| const accounts = process.env.DEPLOYMENT_PRIVATE_KEY |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems weird, no? Don't we just have 1 PK for deployment/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just copied the logic from hardhat.config.ts file, we get the accounts the same way
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it can be simplified with the only key you need for deployment.
For example the DEPLOYER_MASTER_KEY is never used in this context.
I think you can also remove DEPLOYMENT_PRIVATE_KEY, and only use ADMIN_PRIVATE_KEY. Both of them exists in the original hardhat config, as we needed a distinction when we deployed the contract with the scripts not using CREATE2.
| symbol: 'ETH-zksync-testnet', | ||
| decimals: 18, | ||
| name: 'Ether', | ||
| network: 'zkSyncEraTestnet', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any reason why we don't keep the usual format (zk-sync-era-testnet) ?
|
|
||
| config(); | ||
|
|
||
| const accounts = process.env.DEPLOYMENT_PRIVATE_KEY |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it can be simplified with the only key you need for deployment.
For example the DEPLOYER_MASTER_KEY is never used in this context.
I think you can also remove DEPLOYMENT_PRIVATE_KEY, and only use ADMIN_PRIVATE_KEY. Both of them exists in the original hardhat config, as we needed a distinction when we deployed the contract with the scripts not using CREATE2.
|
For posterity, here's the zkSync Era Explorer links: zkSync Era: zkSync Goerli Testnet |
Description of the changes
Deployed ERC20FeeProxy, EthereumFeeProxy and BatchConversionPayments contracts to zkSyncEra.
Added the new chains and contracts to our configs.
Wrote a separate deploy script, based on their docs, that uses their own native Deployer contract.