fixed apiKey for base. verification was not working on blockscout for… #95
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in the pull request involve updates to the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant Hardhat
participant Etherscan
User->>Hardhat: Request to deploy
Hardhat->>Etherscan: Use API key from etherscan.apiKey
Etherscan-->>Hardhat: API key validated
Hardhat-->>User: Deployment successful
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
hardhat.config.js (2)
Line range hint
65-83: Consider adding URL validation for Blockscout endpoints.The
customChainsconfiguration contains hardcoded Blockscout URLs. It would be beneficial to validate these URLs or make them configurable through environment variables for different environments.Consider updating the configuration to support environment-specific URLs:
customChains: [ { network: 'base', chainId: 84532, urls: { - apiURL: 'https://base-sepolia.blockscout.com/api', - browserURL: 'https://base-sepolia.blockscout.com', + apiURL: process.env.BASE_BLOCKSCOUT_API_URL || 'https://base-sepolia.blockscout.com/api', + browserURL: process.env.BASE_BLOCKSCOUT_BROWSER_URL || 'https://base-sepolia.blockscout.com', }, }, // Similar changes for optimism... ],
Environment variables need better documentation in README.md
The environment variables
BASE_BLOCKSCOUT_API_KEYandOP_BLOCKSCOUT_API_KEYare present in.env.examplebut lack proper documentation in README.md. While the README mentions that Blockscout Explorer API keys are needed as prerequisites, it doesn't:
- Explain what these API keys are used for (contract verification)
- Provide direct links to obtain these keys
- Document the expected format or any restrictions
🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
61-83: Verify environment variables are properly documented.The configuration relies on several environment variables for API keys. Let's ensure these are properly documented for other developers.
Let me check the README.md content to see how these environment variables are documented.
Let me check for the .env.example file with hidden files flag and its content.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if environment variables are documented in .env.example or similar files echo "Checking for environment variable documentation..." fd -t f ".env.example|README.md" -X grep -l "BASE_BLOCKSCOUT_API_KEY\|OP_BLOCKSCOUT_API_KEY" # Verify the presence of verification-related documentation echo "Checking for contract verification documentation..." fd -t f "README.md|CONTRIBUTING.md|docs/" -X grep -l "contract verification\|blockscout"Length of output: 421
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check README.md content for environment variables documentation echo "Checking README.md content..." cat README.md # Also check for any .env files that might contain documentation echo -e "\nChecking for .env files..." fd -t f "^\.env" --exec ls -la {}Length of output: 15308
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for .env.example with hidden files flag echo "Checking for .env.example..." fd -H -t f "^\.env\.example$" # If found, display its content echo -e "\nChecking .env.example content..." fd -H -t f "^\.env\.example$" -x cat {}Length of output: 544
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
hardhat.config.js(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
hardhat.config.js (2)
62-62: LGTM! API key configuration follows Hardhat's recommended structure.
The addition of the Base API key in the etherscan.apiKey section is correct and follows Hardhat's documentation guidelines. This should resolve the verification issues on Base network.
Line range hint 61-83: Verify the impact on existing verification workflows.
Since this is a significant change in how contract verification is configured, we should ensure it doesn't break existing CI/CD pipelines or deployment scripts.
✅ Verification successful
The initial scan found verification-related scripts, but we need to examine their content to understand if they depend on the specific configuration being modified. This will help us determine if the changes to the verification config might impact existing workflows.
The verification script shows it uses a standard hardhat verify command and relies on helpers. We need to check the helpers file to see if it depends on the verification configuration being modified. Also, since the previous workflow check failed, we'll look for workflow files in the root directory.
The verification configuration changes are safe to proceed
The code analysis shows that the verification system is well-abstracted and resilient to the configuration changes:
- The verification script (
_verify.js) uses standard Hardhat verify commands and doesn't directly depend on the Etherscan/Blockscout configuration - The helpers file (
_helpers.js) accesses the verification configuration through Hardhat's runtime environment (hre.config) which will automatically handle the new configuration format - The
getExplorerDataFromConfigfunction correctly uses the newcustomChainsstructure to fetch explorer URLs
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any scripts that might be affected by the verification changes
echo "Checking for verification-related scripts..."
rg -l "verify|etherscan" scripts/
rg -l "verify|etherscan" tasks/
# Check for any GitHub Actions workflows that might be affected
echo "Checking CI/CD workflows..."
fd -t f "^.*\.ya?ml$" .github/workflows/ -X grep -l "verify\|etherscan"
Length of output: 515
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the verification-related scripts to understand their dependencies
echo "Content of verification script:"
cat scripts/private/_verify.js
echo -e "\nChecking for hardhat config imports and usage:"
rg -A 5 "require.*hardhat.config" scripts/
Length of output: 3252
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the helpers file for any direct dependencies on verification config
echo "Content of helpers script:"
cat scripts/private/_helpers.js
# Let's also check if there are any GitHub workflow files in the root
echo -e "\nChecking for workflow files in root:"
fd -t f "^.*\.ya?ml$" . -d 1
Length of output: 6990
Base Verification Fix:
Verifications were not working on base. I moved out
apikeyfrometherscan.customChainsand put it inetherscan.apiKeyper the Hardhat docs.Hardhat Docs Section (screenshot below)