Plaza smart contract tooling
Beneficiary:Plaza Smart Contract Tooling
Presentation at Kusamarian AAG
Existing Solidity Tooling Research
After initially reaching out to many potential partners in the Polkadot ecosystem and getting very positive feedback, we assumed the alignment of our proposal with other projects and the overall Plaza vision would be self-evident and sufficient. In hindsight, based on your feedback, the questions and concerns voiced here and in private communication channels, we realised we made a mistake by not including our research work into the initial proposal and should have laid out a lot more details right away.
As always, Playproject takes community feedback (made both publicly and via private channels) very seriously and adapting the proposal to feedback requires to properly research the implications, which is one reason why it took a bit longer to come back.
We have been working to include our research and context, the landscape and technical details to the new version of our proposal as well. We are neither new to Web3, nor Polkadot. We have been actively participating in Polkadot specifically, since our Web3 summit talk in 2019 and over the years have received funding from the Web3 foundation, Bounties and Treasury for various projects. By now, our UX research company accumulated almost a decade of Web3 work experience and contributed to numerous projects. We staff based on project needs and have an extensive network of top talent industry professionals we can source from.
Below we will lay out our updated proposal section by section, starting with an executive summary for each section and the option to dive deeper into the details as well.
We would kindly ask everyone who voted NAY to familiarize themselves with our proposal amendment and eventually reconsider their vote. Thank you very much in advance.
The major areas of the proposal improvement are:
TEAM: lays out the background of our team in great detail, including in the Polkadot ecosystem since 2019. CONTEXT: illuminates the bigger picture around Web3, Polkadot and the "Plaza" vision for everyone not yet familiar. VISION: expands upon specifics of our proposal and how it aligns with "Plaza" and the overall vision for Polkadot and Web3 PROPOSAL: includes all the community feedback into our adapted and re-prioritized proposal with updated deliverables as well. PARTNERS: describes how our proposal integrates synergetically with other Polkadot projects and partners to maximize impact.
Cyrill - Parity compiler team
Rob Habermeier
Alex - Parity smart contract team lead
Comments (21)
Proposal Passed
3
of 3Summary
0%
Aye
0%
Nay
Aye (38)0.0 DOT
Support0.0 DOT
Nay (65)0.0 DOT
Voting Data
Approval%
Support%
Threshold0.00%
Threshold0.00%
[EDIT COMMENT 2024-07-02]
After the team has responded with a much improved V2 of the proposal outlining deliverables and demonstrating some of what the UX would be like, my view have changed and I withdraw my old comment, left below for brevity. I'll be supporting this proposal.
[OLD COMMENT]
Seems like this a rushed proposal attemping to retrofit an existing EVM-based IDE tool onto Polkadot without understanding that Polkadot's design is chasms apart from Ethereum design. For starters, Polkadot does not have any native scripting capabilities, and is designed around statically compiled Rust libraries called pallettes. There is zero VM capabilities whether EVM or "PVM" built into it. It's a layer-0 which hosts layer-1's that have those capabilities.
The IDE concept would have to be fundamentally redesigned at every level, and you cannot just retrofit some existing EVM based IDE onto Polkadot as it seems to be proposed.
It seems this proposal is better suited for Moonbeam.
I think it would be prudent for team to publish some design documentation to justify their ask.
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/885 <- Not having smart contracts on system chains is likely to change.