Closed gbalabasquer closed 3 years ago
If we do not want a factory, then I'd suggest to keep the same way than today where the action is being deployed via the Spell, IMO it feels there is more control of what is being deployed.
I think this makes sense. We'd still have to do a dapp create DssAction
, but maybe that's simpler to write.
Ready for review https://github.com/makerdao/dss-exec-lib/pull/33
Wondering if we should have a
DssExecFactory
for passing theSpellAction
instead of having to do adapp create DssExec
which might introduce some involuntary changes to the contract. So basically removing from the equation thatDssExec
can be wrongly deployed due some contract alteration.This factory would be removed when the new DssGov is implemented, as it will accept actions directly. So I see it like a nice transition, users will create
SpellAction
s which for now will be passed toDssExecFactory
, which will return the spell to be added to theDSChief
. In the future that middle step will be just removed.