Deterministic setup with template

[asgeir-s]

Deterministic Deployment Helper functions Related to https://github.com/gnosis/zodiac-safe-app/issues/94. This contract contains helper functions that can be used to deploy the RealityModule to a deterministic address even though the template ID is unknown at the deployment time.

• This is needed because if a new template is added in the same transaction and where the module is deployed, the template ID is unknown until the transaction executes.
• This is unnecessary if the template ID is already known (the template has been created in an earlier transaction).
• This functionality is helpful if the template will be created and the RealityModule deployed in the same transaction.

The contracts consist of multiple deployment and configuration functions that each have their pros and cons. The reason to provide multiple alternatives is that different circumstances will favor different versions.

---

Usage of the createTemplate function via delegatecall: In this scenario, we deploy the module as normal (just set the templateId to 0). Then create a subsequent delegated call from the safe to createTemplate function. This will create a new template and set the new templateId in one transaction. Kind of like createTemplateAndChangeOwner but without the need to change the owner (the safe will already be the owner) and call via delegated call: Pros:

• The default deployAndSetUpModule function can be used (https://github.com/gnosis/zodiac/blob/dbe820aa8c9ee9d55e938b7fbdc1800dc89702db/src/factory/factory.ts#L7).

Cons:

• The init parameters (for the modules setup function) are required to be customized in the following way:

  • The templateId must be set to 0.

Usage of the createTemplateAndChangeOwner function directly: Pros:

• The default deployAndSetUpModule function can be used (https://github.com/gnosis/zodiac/blob/dbe820aa8c9ee9d55e938b7fbdc1800dc89702db/src/factory/factory.ts#L7).

Cons:

• The init parameters (for the modules setup function) are required to be customized in the following way:
  • The owner of the module must be set to the address of the DeterministicDeploymentHelper contract.
  • The templateId must be set to 0.

• The createTemplateAndChangeOwner function must be called in the same transaction (for instance, via a multisend contract) as the deployment of the module. If not, somebody else could take over ownership of the module.

Usage of the deployWithEncodedParams function directly: Pros:

• The deployment of the module and createTemplateAndChangeOwner functionality are bundled together. There is no risk that the deployment and configuration do not happen in the same transaction.

Cons:

• The init parameters (for the modules setup function) are required to be customized in the following way:
  • The owner of the module must be set to the address of the DeterministicDeploymentHelper contract.
  • The templateId must be set to 0.

• The default deployAndSetUpModule function can NOT be used.

Usage of the deployWithTemplate function directly: Pros:

• The deployment of the module and createTemplateAndChangeOwner functionality are bundled together. There is no risk that the deployment and configuration do not happen in the same transaction.
• The input parameters are used as expected, there is no need to customize the deployment parameters in any special way.

Cons:

• The default deployAndSetUpModule function can NOT be used.

[github-actions[bot]]

CLA Assistant Lite bot All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅

[asgeir-s]

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 3060447398

• 11 of 11 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage remained the same at 100.0%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 2963537893:	0.0%
Covered Lines:	107
Relevant Lines:	107

---

💛 - Coveralls