Deterministic deployments

[bh2smith]

When using upgrades.deployProxy the DeployOptions type interface provided is very different than the usual interface provided in the usual hardhat package. In particular, there are several commonly used deployment options that are no longer available. For example:

  const options: DeployOptions = {
    from: deployer,
    gasLimit: 2000000,
    args: [owner],
    deterministicDeployment: SALT,
    log: true,
  };

Is it possible that the Options interface defined in deploy-proxy could extend the usual hardhat Options to overcome this issue or are these parameters no longer possible when working with proxies?

[frangio]

This is similar to #85, generalizing the idea to all available deployment options.

It would be nice to do something like this, but the additional issue that we have is that a deployProxy call can potentially perform 3 different deployments (implementation, admin, proxy), and upgradeProxy will additionally send a transaction (the upgrade function call). So the question we need to figure out is: should these deployment options be the same for all of these transactions? Or should it be possible to specify options for each deployment separately?

#213 adds a from option that is shared by all deployments and transactions, which I think makes sense. But it is less clear what should happen for gasLimit, for example.

Let me know what you think!

[bh2smith]

It seems the motivation for wanting these is very particular to each use case. For ours, it would be the deterministic deployment that is of most importance (as this can be used to ensure the contracts will all have the same address on different networks - such as xDai). While it is clear that some of these parameters may need to be specified for each individual deployment within deployProxy there are surely some that could easily be carried over as "universal". From those options provided above, it seems to me that log and deterministicDeployment could all be easily considered as universalDeployOptions.

Perhaps its best to tackle this issue in two steps: First being the universal deployment options and the latter (if/when needed) the specifics.

As I am most interested in deterministic deployment, my opinion is rather bias. I would be happy to know if this suggestion might be considered for the project and could perhaps even attempt at making/helping with the changes.

#213 adds a from option that is shared by all deployments and transactions

Yes, this is a nice start, but it appears this PR is dedicated to the truffle plugin as opposed to hardhat. It might be worth mentioning to propagate these changes into the hardhat plugin as well.

[bh2smith]

I have re-evaluated the controversial notion "universal deployment options" and fallen back to something more generic that allows users to specify their own deployer in which they can use whichever DeployOptions they like. This is a non-invasive way of making the requested feature available for those who want it, but leaving things as is for those who are uninterested in such additional overhead.