-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 203
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(entrykit): initial release #3419
Conversation
// TODO: automatically grant allowance in anvil instead of requiring the service | ||
// quarryPassIssuer: { | ||
// http: ["http://127.0.0.1:3003/rpc"], | ||
// }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
// TODO: automatically grant allowance in anvil instead of requiring the service | |
// quarryPassIssuer: { | |
// http: ["http://127.0.0.1:3003/rpc"], | |
// }, |
is this solved by using the generous paymaster (or anvil top up) locally?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the entrykit playground is our development environment, nothing shipped to users, so leaving this will let us more easily play with quarry stuff locally
there tends to be a lot of things to configure in various spots, so commenting this out here is sort of a breadcrumb trail for myself to remember all the things to turn on before getting things wired up properly
in the future, could consider putting this behind some sort of quarry flag where all the quarry params/config are wired in, but there's also services etc. to run in mprocs that make it a bit hard to do conditionally
) : ( | ||
// TODO: convert this to a <ButtonLink> | ||
<a | ||
// TODO: is redstone a fine fallback if chain is not supported or not in our JSON? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i think if relay link doesn't support the chain we should probably not show the top up button or throw an error 🤔 would be bad for users to accidentally to bridge to redstone bc the actual chain wasn't in the config json
// TODO: revisit after demo (don't hardcode gas) | ||
|
||
type rpcMethod = getRpcMethod<BundlerRpcSchema, "eth_estimateUserOperationGas">; | ||
|
||
export async function estimateUserOperationGas( | ||
// eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/no-unused-vars | ||
_params: rpcMethod["Parameters"], | ||
): Promise<rpcMethod["ReturnType"]> { | ||
return formatUserOperationRequest({ | ||
callGasLimit: 20_000_000n, | ||
preVerificationGas: 200_000n, | ||
verificationGasLimit: 2_000_000n, | ||
paymasterVerificationGasLimit: 200_000n, | ||
paymasterPostOpGasLimit: 200_000n, | ||
}); | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
wonder if for now we should do the rpc call and accept the additional round trip rather than hardcoding by default
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
iirc an rpc call is done automatically when this isn't defined here, and there were issues estimating gas when lazily creating the smart account (both passkey and session account)
I can remove for now to see if it works, and if so, revisit this when we get back to passkey smart accounts
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nothing blocking!
Co-authored-by: alvarius <[email protected]>
pulled out of #3240