Governance & Transparent Proxy

Hi all,

I'm looking to use OpenZeppelin's new governance contracts in some demos I'm building, however, I'm running into an issue.

Typically, when I create (transparent) upgradeable smart contracts, I follow the following steps:

  1. Deploy an implementation
  2. Deploy a proxy admin
  3. Deploy a proxy
  4. Use the proxy admin to set the implementation address to the proxy

However, I'm having a hard time doing this with the governance contracts, as I'm not sure who should be the proxy admin. Would the proxy admin be just the proxy itself? Then if I go to propose something on the proxy, the proxy will be the one to upgrade itself if need be?

I think I'm thinking about this right?

Sorry for the delay in replying to this.

When you say "who should be the proxy admin" it's a little confusing because your step 2 is "deploy a proxy admin", so it's pretty clear that the proxy admin contract is the result of your 2nd deployment. But I guess by "proxy admin" you mean the account that can use the ProxyAdmin instance to upgrade the proxy.

If you want a Governor instance that is able to upgrade itself through the governance process, then yes it would be the proxy itself. You're thinking about it correctly!

1 Like

Whoops, my mistake for not following up! I went to the OZ workshop as well and you answered me there. I'm planning on just using UUPS for governance examples, it makes a lot more sense to me, and I'm willing to bet others too.

Also, it's the "cheaper" version so, that's good too.