Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

fix(notional): Fix contract name and bytecode shadowing issues for temp Notional contracts #255

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

cgewecke
Copy link
Contributor

@cgewecke cgewecke commented May 25, 2022

DO NOT MERGE.

(These are small adjustments to get a NotionalTradeModule staging deployment working, published at the notional tag as version 0.11.1-notional. (See deployments-v2 PR 208). They affect contracts that will be removed when IC returns to finalize the NotionalTradeModule after audit)

As part of #251, several contracts that will be published/deployed by Notional in future have been temporarily brought into the repo to enable NotionalTradeModule development and staging_mainnet testing

Unfortunately the way these contracts are imported results in duplicate hardhat artifacts being generated and two problems in the downstream deployments repo:

  • hardhat-etherscan errors with a complaint that it cannot disambiguate between the contract bytecodes for verification
  • hardhat-deploy errors with a complaint that it cannot locate the contract for deployment (when contract names shadow each other)

This PR renames WrappedfCashFactory root-level contract and makes other Notional contract bytecodes slightly different (in an irrelevant way) to get around these.

@cgewecke cgewecke changed the title Rename WrappedfCashFactory to WrappedfCashFactoryExperimental fix(notional): Rename WrappedfCashFactory to WrappedfCashFactoryExperimental May 25, 2022
@cgewecke cgewecke changed the title fix(notional): Rename WrappedfCashFactory to WrappedfCashFactoryExperimental fix(notional): Fix contract name and bytecode shadowing issues for temp Notional contracts May 25, 2022
@ckoopmann
Copy link
Contributor

Note that #256 will remove these temporarily added contracts and should thereby fix these issues.

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants