feat: deploy to Linea

[richard-ramos]

• Splits deployment script in separate deployments per contract (since we might want in the future to deploy different PriceCalculators or WakuRLNV2 contracts).
• Adds https://github.com/Cyfrin/foundry-devops to retrieve the latest address deployed. (Useful when using multiple scripts)
• Adds separate package.json scripts to control the deployment of each individual contract
• Setups the deployment for Linea Sepolia

[0x-r4bbit]

This is cool, but what happens when you don't have a broadcast directory with a previous deployment on your machine?

[richard-ramos]

Hm, good point.
I'll change the script to allow the usage of environment variables and/or indicate you want to use the broadcast directory.

[richard-ramos]

Change implemented in a5acb1d
Now it will by default use the broadcast dir, unless env variables are used for contracts that were already deployed.

[fryorcraken]

I think deployment on Linea testnet is fine.

However, we should have a specific issue to plan and track switching TWN from Ethereum Sepolia to Linea testnet. cc @jm-clius @s-tikhomirov

[jm-clius]

However, we should have a specific issue to plan and track switching TWN from Ethereum Sepolia to Linea testnet

Spoke briefly about this with @s-tikhomirov. We'll create an issue in pm-repo that tracks the steps to get to Linea (mainnet). This will require some thinking, but the steps may look something like this:

1. Deploy contract to a testnet (either Sepolia or Linea Sepolia).
2. Test with some test version of nwaku or nwaku-compose (we don't want to switch everyone without proper registration tools)
3. Update RLN membership registration tools to work with new contract, allowing users to pay for the rate they want.
4. Switch TWN to this version of the testnet contract (by changing nwaku-compose) and announce to ensure everyone upgrades
5. (after some time/tests) Deploy to Linea mainnet and update TWN accordingly (this does not have to be a production version yet, as Linea mainnet may require some testing from our side).

cc @s-tikhomirov

[richard-ramos]

I've deployed the contracts including changes proposed on PR #22 :

0xb9cd878c90e49f797b4431fbf4fb333108cb90e6

For ease of test, I'm using the following test token that can be minted by anyone:
0x185A0015aC462a0aECb81beCc0497b649a64B9ea

cc: @Ivansete-status

[jm-clius]

Some suggested next steps set out here: waku-org/pm#258

[richard-ramos]

@s-tikhomirov @0x-r4bbit I think this PR should be fine to merge once conflicts are fixed, right?

[s-tikhomirov]

Perhaps we should follow the linter's advice and add error messages here?

[richard-ramos]

Not sure if worth it. These are checks that will be executed only during deployment. It's highly likely that we'll be using values hardcoded in the deploy script that will never hit these requires (like we do now).