Upgrade deployer for OVM 2.0

[liamzebedee]

The OVM 2.0 upgrade means that all contracts can now be run natively using EVM code. This removes edge case code we have to navigate around the old OVM 1.0 architecture, where contracts were transpiled to OVM bytecode.

• removing edge cases from deployer
• removing edge cases from verify script
• fixes integration tests to use a newer version of the Optimism ops docker image. My reason for using this instead of just replacing it with a Hardhat chain to test against, is that Optimism is still a moving target, and it will save time to keep testing against their geth instance rather than assuming it's completely EVM compatible with no bugs.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1562 (e41854e) into futures-implementation (e9eb1cd) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@                   Coverage Diff                   @@
##           futures-implementation    #1562   +/-   ##
=======================================================
  Coverage                   93.87%   93.87%           
=======================================================
  Files                          85       85           
  Lines                        2058     2058           
  Branches                      627      627           
=======================================================
  Hits                         1932     1932           
  Misses                        126      126           

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e9eb1cd...e41854e. Read the comment docs.

[jjgonecrypto]

Thanks mate! I do think we should tackle #1504 first though

[liamzebedee]

Thanks mate! I do think we should tackle #1504 first though

No worries, jj. I actually wrote this because I was testing a fresh redeploy of the EVM code on OVM 2.0. Turns out we needed it in the end anyways (see above issues for context).

[artdgn]

@liamzebedee Should we at the same time clean up all the other ovm related flags and flows (e.g. CLI flag, hardhat config, build stage etc etc). Or are there reasons to keep them?

[liamzebedee]

@liamzebedee Should we at the same time clean up all the other ovm related flags and flows (e.g. CLI flag, hardhat config, build stage etc etc). Or are there reasons to keep them?

Yeah we should but I'd say it's better in another PR. The changes here are already running live for Kwenta Futures and to me that justifies merging this in now, and working on the rest of it in a separate one. Thoughts?

[liamzebedee]

That being said - I think I will make the changes here to fix up the tests rather than break CI.

[liamzebedee]

Closing as these changes were merged in #1589, and JJ's done the legwork on the rest of them in #1598