This proposal is now voting on chain. Please vote YES on proposal 918
(You can ignore 917 because it uses the wrong message type)
Summary
This proposal seeks to grant the Valence deployment address osmo1jnfm28czrg4tmff43cav4hwcte6uu2prtr5ngx permission to upload contracts to Osmosis without requiring individual governance approval for each deployment. This would reduce friction, streamline development, and expand cross-chain innovation on Osmosis.
About Valence
Valence is a tech stack for building cross-chain financial applications. It provides developers with a unified execution environment to write, test, compile, and deploy trustless programs across any blockchain, rollup, or other crypto-native domain.
Why Now?
One of our key users is Hydro, the Hub’s Interchain Liquidity Allocator, which facilitates capital deployment across the interchain. Hydro is looking to use Valence to execute cross-chain programs involving actions on Osmosis. By granting Valence a pre-approved deployment address, we can accelerate Hydro’s integration and unlock broader adoption of Osmosis with cross-chain applications.
Benefits to Osmosis
Whitelisting Valence’s deployment address will:
Enable Hydro to increase liquidity and activity on Osmosis, boosting TVL and protocol usage.
Lower barriers for developers to integrate Osmosis into cross-chain applications, driving innovation.
Increase transaction fees and gas expenditure, benefiting Osmosis stakeholders.
This is a simple, low-risk, high-impact change that will foster long-term value for the Osmosis ecosystem.
Call to Action
We welcome community discussion and feedback on this proposal. If there is broad support, we will submit a formal governance proposal
Relevant Links
Website
Docs
X
Change Log
4/1/25: Changed the deployment address to osmo1jnfm28czrg4tmff43cav4hwcte6uu2prtr5ngx as an extra safety precaution due to the error in prop 917. Please ignore prop 917.
5 Likes
Speaking for Hydro: We are really excited to use Valence to deploy funds to Osmosis as trustlessly as possible.
Currently, Hydro is deploying funds worth around $3,000,000 on Osmosis, utilizing a DAO/multisig. We would like Osmosis to be one of the first venues where Hydros liquidity is deployed without relying on this multisig, and instead purely guided by the rules coded into the Valence program. We have been working closely with the Valence team over the last months, and we are close to feeling confident to use the stack in production.
I personally think Valence is one of the pieces that will enable cross-chain DeFi, like Hydro, to work with much less friction, and Osmosis is one of the key venues that will benefit from being more seamless to interact with from throughout the interchain.
4 Likes
Supportive of this!
Both selfishly as a member of the hydro committee multisig wanting to automate more of the deployment process and as someone who wants it to be easier to get hydro POL on Osmosis. 
The prop is low risk (the Valence team is well-known and high quality) and will drive good value to Osmosis. Yes from me.
2 Likes
Bring the crosschain activity! I’m supportive.
3 Likes
Sounds interesting.
Is there also more to be seen with respect to the multisig and deployed funds right now?
And how that exactly will be done using Valence?
2 Likes
Thanks for the interest! I will drop a few links here that give more context:
The funds are deployed for Hydro: https://hydro.cosmos.network/.
The DAO/multisig that is holding the funds can be found here: Hydro Committee
The best documentation for Valence can be found here: Introduction - Valence Protocol Documentation
We also have a WIP doc on how Hydro is integrating Valence here if you are curious: Hydro liquidity deployment tool - Google Docs
3 Likes
I love all the time that went into prepping documentation. I did a quick scan through it (haven’t been reading it in detail, have to admit that :P) but the feeling is that it isn’t jibberish.
Sounds like something I can vote in favor for to see how it goes.
1 Like
Hey everyone, there is a mistake in the proposal to whitelist the Valence deployment address—it uses /cosmwasm.wasm.v1.MsgRemoveCodeUploadParamsAddresses instead of the message to add an address.
Therefore, please ignore prop 917.
We will be in touch soon with a new proposal with the correct information. Thank you for your patience.
1 Like
Hey everyone, we’ve resubmitted the proposal. Please vote YES on proposal 918!
Note that we’ve resubmitted this proposal because we accidentally used the wrong message type in proposal 917. Feel free to ignore proposal 917.
1 Like