IFeeModel/Subscription contract should be provided as a contract address

[derekpierre]

Type of PR:

• Bugfix
• Feature
• Documentation
• Other

Required reviews:

• 1
• 2
• 3

What this does:
SubscriptionContracts/Fee Models are per adopter i.e. the address used is different every time. Therefore, parameters that take this value should take the value as a

Issues fixed/closed:

• Fixes #...

Why it's needed:

Explain how this PR fits in the greater context of the NuCypher Network.
E.g., if this PR address a nucypher/productdev issue, let reviewers know!

Notes for reviewers:

What should reviewers focus on?
Is there a particular commit/function/section of your PR that requires more attention from reviewers?

[cygnusv]

Are you sure this will work? My understanding is that in L114, ape will instantiate fee_model_contract as a generic Contract, so I'm unsure that fee_model_contract.contract_type.name will be available for this check.

[derekpierre]

Yep. Tested it in ape-console and by running the command using Marlin's subscription contract and then quitting once the time came to sign a tx. You can try it out.

Using Contract(...) should automatically fetch the information from the ape-etherscan configured explorer, if it can't get it locally - https://github.com/ApeWorX/ape/blob/v0.8.14/src/ape/managers/chain.py#L1339. It can obtain the ABI from the explorer.

This has been further improved in newer Ape versions as well - https://docs.apeworx.io/ape/stable/userguides/contracts.html#from-any-address (not our current version, but shows that the pattern holds moving forward).