The upcoming release of ink! v6 (currently available as an alpha for early developers) introduces significant changes, including a migration from pallet-contracts (Wasm-based) to pallet-revive (RISC-V based).

Currently, the api-contracts package only supports interaction with pallet-contracts. To support ink! v6, it will need to be updated to interact with pallet-revive, which also introduces a change in the contract address format (AccountId20).

We’ve started experimenting with the changes internally to get a feel for how things might look.: https://github.com/use-ink/polkadot-js-api/pull/1/files

The main differences involve switching the pallet interaction from pallet-contracts to pallet-revive, and adjusting to the new contract address format (AccountId20).

These changes would make the updated code compatible only with ink! v6, and not with ink! v5 (which depends on pallet-contracts).

Happy to collaborate and help with the implementation but I’d love to hear your thoughts on the best approach moving forward:

• Should we update the existing api-contracts to support only ink! v6 (pallet-revive), dropping support for pallet-contracts?

• Should we introduce a new package (e.g., api-revive) that mirrors api-contracts but is tailored specifically for ink! v6?

• Alternatively, should we add new components for pallet-revive within the same library. For example creating a CodePromiseRevive (similar to CodePromise)?