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

Add entrypoint to deploy against existing Superchain #11791

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 11, 2024

Conversation

mslipper
Copy link
Collaborator

@mslipper mslipper commented Sep 6, 2024

Creates a separate entrypoint in the deploy script to allow an L2 to be deployed against an existing set of Superchain contracts. The deployment assumes that the Superchain contracts have been deployed correctly. The L2 still gets its own ProxyAdmin, AddressManager, and Safe. The API is additive and backwards-compatible.

@mslipper mslipper force-pushed the feat/existing-superchain-entrypoing branch from c58cd62 to cb5191d Compare September 9, 2024 03:14
@mslipper mslipper marked this pull request as ready for review September 9, 2024 03:14
@mslipper mslipper requested a review from a team as a code owner September 9, 2024 03:14
@mslipper mslipper force-pushed the feat/existing-superchain-entrypoing branch 2 times, most recently from 41ea87e to caa913d Compare September 9, 2024 04:35
Creates a separate entrypoint in the deploy script to allow an L2 to be deployed against an existing set of Superchain contracts. The deployment assumes that the Superchain contracts have been deployed correctly. The L2 still gets its own ProxyAdmin, AddressManager, and Safe. The API is additive and backwards-compatible.
@mslipper mslipper force-pushed the feat/existing-superchain-entrypoing branch from caa913d to 87c90ae Compare September 9, 2024 04:38
Copy link
Contributor

@maurelian maurelian left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

TBH I had some trouble following the logic, with all the various run functions, but I'm starting to see how it makes sense and minimizes actual diffs.

I think it's tech debt that the same proxy admin is used for OP Mainnet and the Superchain contracts, but I don't think we should fix that here/now.

If you're good with the suggestion, I'll finalize my reviewing by comparing before and after state dumps.

@mslipper
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mslipper commented Sep 9, 2024

Suggestions accepted - let me know if you need anything else!

Copy link
Contributor

@maurelian maurelian left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. I ran the script and generated the state dump on the base commit and this one, then compared both:

  1. the logs: the only difference was that Setting up Superchain is emitted later in the process
  2. the state dumps: there was no diff whatsoever.

So this LGTM.

@mslipper mslipper added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 11, 2024
Merged via the queue into develop with commit 84b1cde Sep 11, 2024
59 checks passed
@mslipper mslipper deleted the feat/existing-superchain-entrypoing branch September 11, 2024 18:42
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.

2 participants