no method named "owner" on contract when deploying

[mwawrusch]

Describe the bug When installing or upgrading through hardhat-deploy I get the following error message after the contracts have been deployed but before the facets have been installed: no method named "owner" on contract ... See full error message below. I am using a inherited version of the contract (see below).

Manually adding facets through louper worked though, and no problems in development either.

To Reproduce I can provide access to the github.

versions

• hardhat-deploy 0.11.34
• hardhat 2.17.0
• nodejs 18.14.2

Additional context

 at processTicksAndRejections (node:internal/process/task_queues:95:5)
    at async _deployViaDiamondProxy (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat-deploy/src/helpers.ts:2476:30)
    at async Object.func (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/deploy/001_deploy_dekoh.ts:49:39)
    at async DeploymentsManager.executeDeployScripts (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat-deploy/src/DeploymentsManager.ts:1226:22)
    at async DeploymentsManager.runDeploy (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/rxxx/node_modules/hardhat-deploy/src/DeploymentsManager.ts:1059:5)
    at async SimpleTaskDefinition.action (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat-deploy/src/index.ts:438:5)
    at async Environment._runTaskDefinition (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat/src/internal/core/runtime-environment.ts:333:14)
    at async Environment.run (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat/src/internal/core/runtime-environment.ts:166:14)
    at async SimpleTaskDefinition.action (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat-deploy/src/index.ts:584:32)
    at DeploymentsManager.executeDeployScripts (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat-deploy/src/DeploymentsManager.ts:1229:19)
    at processTicksAndRejections (node:internal/process/task_queues:95:5)
    at async DeploymentsManager.runDeploy (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat-deploy/src/DeploymentsManager.ts:1059:5)
    at async SimpleTaskDefinition.action (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat-deploy/src/index.ts:438:5)
    at async Environment._runTaskDefinition (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat/src/internal/core/runtime-environment.ts:333:14)
    at async Environment.run (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev//node_modules/hardhat/src/internal/core/runtime-environment.ts:166:14)
    at async SimpleTaskDefinition.action (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat-deploy/src/index.ts:584:32)
    at async Environment._runTaskDefinition (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat/src/internal/core/runtime-environment.ts:333:14)
    at async Environment.run (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat/src/internal/core/runtime-environment.ts:166:14)
    at async SimpleTaskDefinition.action (/Users/martinwawrusch/Dev/xxx/node_modules/hardhat-deploy/src/index.ts:669:5)

Diamond code
```
import { Diamond } from "hardhat-deploy/solc_0.8/diamond/Diamond.sol";

contract DekohDiamond is Diamond {

/// @notice This construct a diamond contract
/// @param _contractOwner the owner of the contract. With default DiamondCutFacet, this is the sole address allowed to make further cuts.
/// @param _diamondCut the list of facet to add
/// @param _initializations the list of initialization pair to execute. This allow to setup a contract with multiple level of independent initialization.
constructor(
    address _contractOwner,
    IDiamondCut.FacetCut[] memory _diamondCut,
    Initialization[] memory _initializations
) payable Diamond(_contractOwner, _diamondCut, _initializations)

{ } }

[mwawrusch]

To add to that:

defaultOwnershipFacet is set to false, which probably causes this.

[apollox-apx]

During the use of hardhat-deploy, I encountered a situation similar to issue #477. I would like to share my perspective. I believe the Diamond contract does not necessarily need to have the OwnershipFacet, as it is not part of the eip-2535 standard and thus does not require the owner method. In terms of permission management, considering its limited authority, I may not use the OwnershipFacet. Instead, I am inclined to use the AccessControlEnumerableFacet for better permission management. Providing this feedback may help improve and optimize this library for a better user experience.

Many thanks for your efforts and contributions to the community. Looking forward to seeing this issue resolved and to the ongoing progress and development of your project.

[apollox-apx]

https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-2535#ownership-and-authentication