Deployment and Verification Abstraction #787
JacobHomanics
started this conversation in
Ideas
Replies: 0 comments
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Original rationale and discussion found HERE.
@technophile-04 Your proposed solution alleviates the pain points I was having and I think its a more than satisfactory solution. However, it is not a perfect solution to me, but it may just end up being a nitpick.
*original quote modified here to fit example below.
With the above example, I personally see each deploy script as it's own configured deployment. Thus, overriding the generated abi's should be expected. For instance, If I am only interacting with
YourContract
then I should callyarn deploy
, but if I am interacting with the factory and upgradeable then I should calldeployFactory
.The important thing here is that this approach allows for several "deployment configurations" to co-exist and the developer can pick and choose which one most necessarily fits their current situation. EDIT: The idea of changing package.json instead of Deploy.s.sol fits better with me as well, as it feels less intrusive. /EDIT As opposed to @technophile-04's solution, where they need to modify the deploy.s.sol script to fit their needs, potentially erasing important details and coming up with hacks (commenting out code) to reach the desired functionality. Again, I think it is a great solution, but we can do slightly better!
Even if the "recommended" method ends up being a single Deploy script, then I think we should still go through with the changes proposed in the PR. As, it inherently allows the system to be more flexible, and could cover an edge case or two where the developer came to the same conclusion as I and had hit a wall, where otherwise, they would've been able to continue onward even with the "improper" method.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions