refactor(contracts): Standardize WZETA contract version #127
Conversation
This file contains 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
lukema95
requested review from
andresaiello,
lucas-janon,
fadeev and
a team
as code owners
|
We actually have WZETA in protocol contracts. Ideally, we don't have duplicate versions of the same contract. @andresaiello would it be possible to update WZETA in protocol contracts to 0.8.7? |
the reason why we use that version on protocol is to have the same bytecode as ethereum WETH. it's some kind of guarantee. But I'm pro having an updated version on examples and other stuff |
andresaiello
approved these changes
May 6, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In order to unify the contract versions, so that external projects can make the code more concise when relying on the contract of the project, the version of the
WZETA.solcontract was changed to use the 0.8.7 version syntax.Relevant issue: #128