feat: adjust eip-1559

[rkdud007]

Add option to adjust EIP-1559 gas fields in the Hardhat Network config

I opened an issue few days ago. I changed some values and add one unit-test function.
issue number is #3298
hope hardhat team can take a look at my code and give me feedbacks!

• Because this PR includes a bug fix, relevant tests have been included.
• Because this PR includes a new feature, the change was previously discussed on an Issue or with someone from the team.
• I didn't do anything of this.

---

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 2b3a342

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated
hardhat	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Nov 8, 2022 at 0:58AM (UTC)
hardhat-storybook	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Nov 8, 2022 at 0:58AM (UTC)

[github-actions]

This issue is also being tracked on Linear.

We use Linear to manage our development process, but we keep the conversations on Github.

LINEAR-ID: fbfa417b-1b6d-488c-a456-80d3140012a9

[fvictorio]

Hi @rkdud007, sorry for not reviewing your PR before.

There are a couple of problems here. First, it has compilation errors. Second, I don't think the behavior is correct, and there are some edge cases that are not handled (what happens if you set both gasPrice and maxFeePerGas? I think that should be an error; in fact, I think we should only add the max priority fee option, and that gasPrice works as max fee per gas when the priority is set).

Besides, there are no tests and the linter fails.

I think the first step here is to properly define the feature and the different behaviors. I opened #3418 to track that effort.

In the meantime, I'm going to close this PR for bookkeeping reasons. After we properly define the feature, feel free to open a new PR. But please make sure that 1) it compiles, 2) the linter passes and 3) it has proper tests.