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

buidler-etherscan plugin import #234

Merged
merged 47 commits into from
Jul 5, 2019
Merged

buidler-etherscan plugin import #234

merged 47 commits into from
Jul 5, 2019

Conversation

alcuadrado
Copy link
Member

This plugin was developed in this PR: NomicFoundation/buidler-etherscan#2

There are a few things that are needed before merging this PR:

  1. The README describes how to install the plugin's project. Not how to install the plugin in a Buidler project. It should have been based on the rest of the plugin's READMEs.
  2. It unnecessarily extends the environment.
  3. We should figure out a way to run this on travis, or directly skip most of its tests (when in travis).
  4. I'm not sure if config is handled properly. I saw some failing tests by running WALLET_PRIVATE_KEY="0x1f922fed6c1c5d33c723e1143e1e4e9703aabb5b6a8d9a8aa685c1a08dca726b" npm run test

Copy link
Member Author

@alcuadrado alcuadrado left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What do you think about removing the ContractCompiler class?

I think using run(TASK_COMPILE) and readArtifact should be enough for this plugin.

@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ export default function() {
const packageJson = await getPackageJson();
flattened += `// Sources flattened with buidler v${
packageJson.version
} https://getbuidler.com`;
} https://buidler.dev`;
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch :)

.gitignore Outdated
@@ -90,3 +90,5 @@ typings/
# DynamoDB Local files
.dynamodb/

# Allow a dummy project in this directory for testing purposes
myproject
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you move this to the top-ish of the file? The last part of this gitignore is copied from GH's one. Keeping our things separated will make it easier to maintain.

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
[![npm](https://img.shields.io/npm/v/@nomiclabs/buidler-etherscan.svg)](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@nomiclabs/buidler-etherscan)

# buidler-solhint
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should probably make sure that this follows the boilerplate's readme template. What do you think?

{
"name": "@nomiclabs/buidler-etherscan",
"version": "0.0.1",
"description": "Buidler TypeScript plugin for verifying contracts on etherscan",
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't get the TS reference, do you?

);
}

console.log({ sourceInTask: source });
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Console.log

@jjant jjant force-pushed the buidler-etherscan-import branch 2 times, most recently from 3a20618 to c11324e Compare July 5, 2019 16:23
@jjant jjant force-pushed the buidler-etherscan-import branch 4 times, most recently from 50127b3 to ad8a22c Compare July 5, 2019 19:02
@jjant jjant force-pushed the buidler-etherscan-import branch from ad8a22c to 13805a7 Compare July 5, 2019 19:27
@jjant jjant merged commit 622c95b into master Jul 5, 2019
@jjant jjant deleted the buidler-etherscan-import branch July 5, 2019 19:35
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 24, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants