Reviewed 3 of 5 files at r1, 2 of 2 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware)

crates/apollo_deployments/src/deployment_definitions/sepolia_integration.rs line 23 at r2 (raw file):

    );

const FIRST_NODE_NAMESPACE: &str = "apollo-sepolia-integration-0";

Should you mention "sepolia" somewhere?
I find it confusing that in all modules it has the same name "FIRST_NODE_NAMESPACE".

crates/apollo_deployments/src/deployment.rs line 281 at r2 (raw file):

    namespace: &'static str,
) -> InstanceConfigOverride {
    let accepted_node_id_range = 1..=MAX_NODE_ID;

Seems like overkill.
What about checking that id >= 1 && id <= MAX_NODE_ID?

crates/apollo_deployments/src/deployment.rs line 299 at r2 (raw file):

    const MEMPOOL_SERVICE_PORT: u16 = 53200;

    if id == 1 {

Consider changing the id to be zero based, therefore compatible with "node_0" semantic.
In the secret_key you can encode "id+1" for simplicity.

crates/apollo_deployments/src/deployment.rs line 303 at r2 (raw file):

            "",
            true,
            "0x0101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101",

Consider extracting the secret_key formatting outside the if/else and using it in 4 places.

Reviewable status: 3 of 5 files reviewed, 4 unresolved discussions (waiting on @matanl-starkware)

crates/apollo_deployments/src/deployment.rs line 281 at r2 (raw file):

The code below

    assert!(id >= 1 && id < MAX_NODE_ID, "Node id {} is out of range [1,{:?})", id, MAX_NODE_ID);

Results in this error

manual \`RangeInclusive::contains\` implementation  
for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#manual\_range\_contains  
\`#\[warn(clippy::manual\_range\_contains)\]\` on by defaultclippy[Click for full compiler diagnostic](rust-analyzer-diagnostics-view:/diagnostic message [0]?0#file:///home/itay/workspace/sequencer3/crates/apollo_deployments/src/deployment.rs)

deployment.rs(281, 13): use: \`(1..=MAX\_NODE\_ID).contains(&id)\`

However, when transitioning to zero-based indexing as your comment below suggested, the condition itself becomes simpler as usize is automatically > 0.

TLDR: done.

crates/apollo_deployments/src/deployment.rs line 299 at r2 (raw file):

Done.

crates/apollo_deployments/src/deployment_definitions/sepolia_integration.rs line 23 at r2 (raw file):

They are all private consts, do you suggest renaming them in each respective module?

Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware)

crates/apollo_deployments/src/deployment.rs line 303 at r2 (raw file):

Actually, what I meant was something like (avoid 2 times formatting):

Code snippet:

let secret_key = format!("0x.....{}", id + 1);
let validator_id = format!("0x{}", id + 1);
if (id == 0) {
    InstanceConfigOverride::new(
        &secret_key,
        ...
        &secret_key,
        validator_id,
    )
}
else {
    InstanceConfigOverride::new(
        &secret_key,
        ...
        &secret_key
        validator_id,
    )
}

crates/apollo_deployments/src/deployment_definitions/sepolia_integration.rs line 23 at r2 (raw file):

If you accept my suggestion, then the answer is yes - all others should be renamed as well.
But I also see the "beauty" that they all have the same name.
I leave it for you to decide.

Reviewed 3 of 5 files at r1, 1 of 2 files at r3, 1 of 1 files at r4, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @Itay-Tsabary-Starkware)