When will this not be the router address that we use for approvals? It will always be the router address. address_for_approvals sounds to me very vague (which approvals?).
I decided to make ProtocolApprovalsManager public method sync not to propagate asynceness early on onto the rest of the code. If later we decide that it is better to have this async, it should be easier to make that change than the opposite one.
--- don't change below this line ---
ENG-4064 Took 24 minutes
No more SingleSwapStrategyEncoder or SequentialStrategyEncoder
No more batch routing (so no need for batch permits as well). If multiple solutions are found, return multiple Transactions
--- don't change below this line ---
ENG-4076 <#DTT#>
- Move all evm code inside evm directory
- StrategyEncoder:
- Kept StrategyEncoder trait but created a new one: EVMStrategyEncoder to implement encode_protocol_header (that is evm specific).
- All StrategyEncoders implement both traits now
- Renamed DefaultStrategySelector -> EVMStrategySelector
- RouterEncoder:
- Created a RouterEncoder trait and a EVMRouterEncoder that implements it
- Moved utils inside evm directory as well
- Renamed config.json -> executor_addresses.json and moved it to a higher config directory
- Make alloy optional and dependent on the evm feature gate
--- don't change below this line ---
ENG-4075 <#DTT#>
Make Permit2 and TokenApprovalsManager implement it.
This way in the RouternEncoder we can use either one (I'm not exactly sure what this would mean in the contract though)
I'm not sure I like this generalisation. The TokenApprovalsManager was made with a different purpose: to approve token allowances for the pools (like balancer and curve) for our router
