Mark Tyneway
Mark Tyneway
cc @MSilb7 @sebastianst should we still consider this PR?
> There should be a standard way to pass arbitrary configuration parameters I definitely agree with this, hardhat handles this with scripts by allowing you to define arbitrary CLI params....
This is correct @zhiqiangxu. Celestia and EiganDA will have their own security mechanisms
There is no need to call `sync()` anymore, the guide needs an update cc @smartcontracts
> Can this get revisited and approved? It's required for [ethereum-optimism/optimism#11527](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/issues/11527) to be implemented. > > I think using loose versioning (`^0.8.0`) would be better in this case so it...
Per https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/specs/issues/122#issuecomment-2308584680, this makes a lot of sense to implement as a `ConfigType`
This looks good to me, can merge at the same time as the implementation PR
> I don't know if you want to add it already here but the `keccak256` hash of the runtime bytecode of `CreateX` is `0xbd8a7ea8cfca7b4e5f5041d7d4b17bc317c5ce42cfbc42066a00cf26b43eb53f`. Thank you @pcaversaccio, it could be...
@blockchaindevsh The batcher will need to be aware of the fact that the batch inbox is dynamic. It will need to do one of the following: 1) Listen to events...
How would `op-node` know which [batch inbox is canonical](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/blob/100f526efca8c9611c52766360fc487f68363e30/op-node/rollup/derive/data_source.go#L96)?