Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 24, 2023. It is now read-only.

[feat] Provide API for verification of immutable contracts in Sourcify #535

Open
e00dan opened this issue Sep 30, 2022 · 1 comment
Open
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@e00dan
Copy link
Contributor

e00dan commented Sep 30, 2022

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

This is a feature request. Here's explanation of immutable contracts: https://docs.sourcify.dev/docs/immutables/. It would be great if Godwoken integrated verification of immutable contracts via https://sourcify.dev.


Demo repository: https://github.com/Kuzirashi/immutable-proxy-demo

Example contracts on Godwoken Testnet:
LendingPool implementation: 0xfD373C524601F405b4403fDA0CBd947C9c82Af3F (verified on Sourcify 👍 )
LendingPoolAddressesProvider: 0xeAC53aC47Fd20500AAd301a6f8071d2e2E5aD917 (verified on Sourcify 👍 )

Lending pool PROXY address: 0xb34030df3686f08603792443696A2675a0dACF21 (can't verify on Sourcify 🔴 )
image

@e00dan e00dan added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 30, 2022
@RetricSu
Copy link
Contributor

RetricSu commented Oct 8, 2022

hi, I have some questions:

  1. from the docs

It will then try to find the tx that created the contract by scraping the blockexplorer pattern given in sourcify-chains.ts.

why sourcify can't get the creation tx hash from our godwoken explorer?

  1. If I understand correctly, the feature request on godwoken-web3 will be something like:
{
    "jsonrpc": "2.0",
    "method": "poly_getContractCreationTxHash",
    "params": [
        "0xcf5dccb5ceaddaeebf36affd16d5a4bd1ffa5193" // contract address
    ],
    "id": 1
}
{
 "0x....." // tx hash
}

am I correct?


from my point of view, I think it will be better to fetch this kind of data from godwoken explore instead of godwoken-web3

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants