feat: Plasma Deployments #1114
Merged
feat: Plasma Deployments #1114
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>
fusmanii
requested review from
bmzig,
mrice32,
nicholaspai and
pxrl
as code owners
bmzig
reviewed
Sep 22, 2025
| "transaction_hash": "Unknown", | ||
| "block_number": 1552582 | ||
| }, | ||
| "SpokePoolVerifier": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
2 small questions:
- Why does the
transaction_hashresolve as unknown? If it's not important, then why even include it as part of thisdeployed-addresses.json? - Should we be deploying the spoke pool verifier or the spoke pool periphery, which should include the spoke pool verifier logic?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- The
transaction_hashget populated if the contract has been deployed with foundry, I will have a follow up PR to populate all the missing fields fromdeployments - Good point, I wasn't familiar with SpokePoolPeriphery contract, I can deploy that as well
Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>
bmzig
previously approved these changes
Sep 22, 2025
Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>
|
All alerts resolved. Learn more about Socket for GitHub. This PR previously contained dependency changes with security issues that have been resolved, removed, or ignored. |
Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>
nicholaspai
reviewed
Sep 22, 2025
| plasma: { | ||
| chainId: CHAIN_IDs.PLASMA, | ||
| url: getNodeUrl(CHAIN_IDs.PLASMA), | ||
| saveDeployments: true, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a thought: I wonder if we can clean up this file by making a default config object function:
defaultConfig(chainId: number): {
return {
chainId,
url: getNodeUrl(chainId),
saveDeployments: true,
accounts: { mnemonic },
companionNetworks: { l1: "mainnet" },
}
}
nicholaspai
previously approved these changes
Sep 22, 2025
pxrl
previously approved these changes
Sep 22, 2025
Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>
nicholaspai
approved these changes
Sep 22, 2025
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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.