Notice: Polkadot has migrated to AssetHub. Balances, data, referenda, and other on-chain activity has moved to AssetHub.Learn more
Treasury proposal: sc-simnode continuous development and improvement financing
Hello everyone,
There is demand for a testing framework that simulate transactions as it would happen on-chain, this can give valuable insight before making any major change to the runtime, sc-simnode does just that and more. Developed and maintained by Polytope Labs, a blockchain research and development lab.
We are seeking financing for the continuous development and improvement of sc-simnode through treasury proposals. This post is here to gather your feedback on the proposal before submission on chain.
You can find all the details of the proposal here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x8lFHv1LZTr0y_Ifn8YzxirNftabaH0dWzzt9zSv6ik/edit#heading=h.tcq61mlmv7q4
Thank you for reading
Jesse Chejieh
Comments (3)
Saw this comment regarding the proposal on Twitter and thought it was pertinent to raise here in the discussion. It's worthwhile noting that the statement in question ("The completion of these milestones is not a counterpart for the DOTs, and no liability exists for the completion of this work.") is also present in the Smoldot proposal raised a couple of weeks ago, so this conversation applies to that discussion in the same way.
My question & concern: Is shirking all liability regarding the outcomes of the proposal a healthy precedent to set for treasury funded projects? I understand that projects hit blockers and unexpected events that might impact the team's ability to make the deliverables, and a catch-all statement like this mitigates against that. However, there must be an alternative solution that protects the treasury's interests in a better way. For example, a proposal including a simple outline of the risks that may prevent the deliverables from being completed.
Overall the proposal is great, two points that stick out:
Hourly rate is 2x 99% of proposals that I've seen via the treasury.
While 50% of the proposal is for making video content and updating docs, I think it would make more sense to see a decreased rate for the non development work.
The phrase, "Please note that these milestones are provided as a best effort estimate, and the reality might differ. The completion of these milestones is not a counterpart for the DOTs, and no liability exists for the completion of this work. The actual work that has been performed will be showcased after the noted duration has elapsed. If you were to be unsatisfied with the work, we invite you to raise the issue at that time." in the treasury proposal feels very non committal, what are we actually expecting to be delivered? While I believe the team have a good track record, I would prefer to not see future proposals (I believe one was already approved and funded for the Smoldot development with this line in it) carry text like this.
IMO, If you are creating a treasury proposal, it's up to you to deliver on the milestones and items set out in your proposal, if you dramatically underestimate, that's on you, not on the treasury / community.