Next Version of sBTC Clarity Scaffolding

[setzeus]

Scaffolding For Next Version of sBTC Clarity Contracts

Summary of Changes

This PR is tied to #353 & is an attempt to scaffold the next version of sBTC Clarity contracts based on the design researched & reviewed by the community. There is no code yet in any of the contracts.

Testing

No testing as none of the contracts included here have anything to test.

Risks

This appears relatively risk-free since the only possible this can effect Romeo is if a directory change broke items needed along some process.

How were these changes tested?

They weren't since there is no code inside any of these contracts yet.

Checklist:

• [x ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have performed a self-review of my code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• My changes generate no new warnings
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

[friedger]

Why next folder? Will there be a main folder as well?

[setzeus]

@friedger negative, changing to sbtc-nakamoto. Made that name as a place holder.

[moodmosaic]

LGTM (for the changes in romeo/asset-contract) stacks-network/sbtc#354 (comment)

[friedger]

Why is romeo rust binary under clarity?
Top-level clarity folder does not make sense to me :-)

[friedger]

Why do we need stacking order here?

[friedger]

Clarinet.toml is missing

[friedger]

What is the acceptance criteria here?
Should we at least be able to run clarinet check and yarn test

[friedger]

Better name here

[setzeus]

Why is romeo rust binary under clarity? Top-level clarity folder does not make sense to me :-)

The idea here is to create a single Clarity directory that holds different versions of sBTC - both the previous (Romeo) & new (Nakamoto) versions in this case.

Re: Rust binary was already in /src file in when copied over but you're right, we might as well remove /src & other files in that level since all Clarity items are in the "asset-contract" directory.

[moodmosaic]

What is the acceptance criteria here? Should we at least be able to run clarinet check and yarn test

@friedger I checked both when I rebased (and force-pushed) for romeo/asset-contract using Clarinet 1.8.0:

$ clarinet check
✔ 5 contracts checked

$ npm install && npm test

 ✓ tests/asset.test.ts (6) 26195ms
 ✓ tests/clarity-bitcoin-mini-deploy.test.ts (1)

And we still need to port the stuff in ext and scripts for the tests written in Clarity so they can run with the new SDK.

Reviewed the changes in romeo/asset-contract and it appears that a wider review is warranted.

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.