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

feat(universal-router-sdk): support unichain mainnet on universal-router-sdk #206

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 25, 2024

Conversation

xrsv
Copy link
Collaborator

@xrsv xrsv commented Nov 21, 2024

Description

Support unichain mainnet on universal router sdk

Note: UR address is temporary and will change again in near future

How Has This Been Tested?

Will test in routing

Are there any breaking changes?

No

@xrsv xrsv requested review from jsy1218 and a team as code owners November 21, 2024 18:20
Copy link

graphite-app bot commented Nov 21, 2024

Graphite Automations

"Request reviewers once CI passes on sdks monorepo" took an action on this PR • (11/21/24)

1 reviewer was added and 1 assignee was added to this PR based on 's automation.

Copy link
Contributor

@hensha256 hensha256 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the address and creation block look correct to me, but is it correct that the same UR is used for V1_2 and V2_0? I dont know what those specific versions mean in the sdk

@xrsv
Copy link
Collaborator Author

xrsv commented Nov 22, 2024

the address and creation block look correct to me, but is it correct that the same UR is used for V1_2 and V2_0? I dont know what those specific versions mean in the sdk

@hensha256 yes this should be fine - see entries of other chains above, all have same address for those (except sepolia).
Those are going to come into play once v4 is introduced I believe (related PR here that introduce this split)

@xrsv xrsv merged commit 1eede93 into main Nov 25, 2024
8 checks passed
@jsy1218
Copy link
Member

jsy1218 commented Dec 2, 2024

the address and creation block look correct to me, but is it correct that the same UR is used for V1_2 and V2_0? I dont know what those specific versions mean in the sdk

@hensha256 v1_2 means UR with v2 and v3, i.e., v2 everywhere. v2_0 means UR with v2 and v3 and v4. Unichain initial deploy will have a single UR with v2 and v3 and v4 right? Hence being the same seems no harm.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants