fix: make weth bridge addresses optional #190
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
danijelTxFusion
approved these changes
Jul 9, 2024
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 9, 2024
## [5.9.1](v5.9.0...v5.9.1) (2024-07-09) ### Bug Fixes * make weth bridge addresses optional ([#190](#190)) ([ce56b44](ce56b44))
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 5.9.1 🎉 The release is available on GitHub release Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What 💻
Use erc20 bridge addresses if weth bridge addresses are not present.
Why ✋
Currently weth bridge addresses are required, and getL1BridgeContracts/getL2BridgeContracts function fails.
Evidence 📷
Include screenshots, screen recordings, or
consoleoutput here demonstrating that your changes work as intendedNotes 📝
This should fix deposits to the chains with custom base token.