Add ERC721 and ERC1155 receiver support in Governor, Timelock #3230
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ashwinYardi
changed the title
|
Hello @ashwinYardi I've done some modification, particularly adding the interface inheritance and adding ERC165 support for the ERC1155Receiver (as requested by the ERC) Notes for @frangio: the code would be simple if we added inheritance from the ERC721Holder & ERC1155Holder, but that would break the storage layout for the upgradeable version. We should do that properly in 5.0. |
frangio
changed the title
Amxx
previously approved these changes
Mar 24, 2022
Amxx
approved these changes
Mar 24, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #3174
The main purpose of the PR is to add support for receiving ERC721 and ERC1155 tokens in Governor, Timelock and MinimalForwarder contract. These contracts are responsible for sending transactions to and hence interacting with a lot of protocols.
I have added all the hooks in the main implementation contracts. I was thinking of creating a dedicated contracts and inherting them in the main implementation. However as per @Amxx 's comment, this might break the storage compatibility with respect to upgradable contracts. Please let me know if there is any better way to handle this. :)
PR Checklist