Conversation
|
EDIT: deleted old calldata |
thomas-waite
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good overall, few tidy up comments
proposals/dao/timelock_admin.ts
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: Remove this console.log
| // This should exclusively include new contract deployments | ||
| const deploy: DeployUpgradeFunc = async (deployAddress: string, addresses: NamedAddresses, logging: boolean) => { | ||
| const factory = (await hre.ethers.getContractFactory('ERC20PCVDepositWrapper')) as ERC20PCVDepositWrapper__factory; | ||
| const rariTimelockFeiOldLens = await factory.deploy(addresses.rariInfraFeiTimelock, addresses.fei, true); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will make sure to add lenses for contracts with significant Fei that are becoming part of the Fei ecosystem in the future!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would probably add a TIP number?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Think this is leftover commenting and needs deleting? tokemak_withdraw and tip_112 can both be removed.
pod_exec_v2 needs to stay here, it hasn't been proposed/executed by the TC yet
|
|
||
| // Increase PCV balance to exceed deviation threshold | ||
| const pcvStats = await collateralizationOracleWrapper.pcvStats(); | ||
| await namedStaticPCVDepositWrapper.addDeposit({ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this test relies on named static PCV deposit which will be deprecated in this proposal. Erwan's #923 also deprecates the keeper
thomas-waite
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks fine to me, will give a final once over tomorrow then approve
| values: '0', | ||
| method: 'grantRole(bytes32,address)', | ||
| arguments: (addresses) => [ | ||
| '0x471cfe1a44bf1b786db7d7104d51e6728ed7b90a35394ad7cc424adf8ed16816', // SWAP_ADMIN_ROLE |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit, you can import ethers now and replace this with ethers.utils.id('SWAP_ADMIN_ROLE)
| expect(await contracts.namedStaticPCVDepositWrapper.numDeposits()).to.be.equal('0'); | ||
| expect(await contracts.ethToDaiLBPSwapper.swapEndTime()).to.be.gt( | ||
| ethers.BigNumber.from((await time.latest()).toString()) | ||
| ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Depends how confident are, but I would probably make sure you can do a swap via the LBP pool here
| false, | ||
| false | ||
| ], | ||
| description: 'Withdraw 10k ETH to LBP Swapper' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Weights are 95 / 5 . You're sending $1m DAI and ~$10.5m ETH. So overfunding by $500k, should be fine
|
Calldata: Execute Calldata: |
thomas-waite
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks okay to me. I would add a validation that you can do a swap and that the implied price is reasonable first if there's time.
Have verified the propose and execute calldata, looks good
PR Type: Feature
PR Description:
Executes a few cleanup actions related to collateralization and operations:
PR Checklist - Feature (Proposal)