Questions:
How many chains, and their validators, and nominators in the Polkadot ecosystem are currently excluded from being able to use the current Polkadot Staking Dashboard?
What new users are going to be seamlessly onboarded through "enhancements" that you will make using the funds in this proposal? Is it going to be designed so that minimal configuration is required for them to be onboarded?
With regards to "enhancing" the Polkadot Staking Dashboard, will the funding in this proposal go towards onboarding and supporting Parachains and Substrate-based Stand-alone chains (aka solo chains) that currently want to use it but can't? At the moment, the Polkadot Staking Dashboard currently only appears to support Relay chains, and System Parachains (People Chains).
A Non-System parachain may have a coretime lease that expires, and it may be necessary for them to temporarily switch to being a Stand-alone chain (aka solo chain), but if that happened would their community still be able to use the Polkadot Staking Dashboard?
A Stand-alone Chain may not want the extra complexity of using the People Chain for identities, but if they chose not to would they still be able to seamlessly configure and use the Polkadot Staking Dashboard?
If the Polkadot Staking Dashboard gets "enhanced" to support Non-System Parachains and Stand-alone Chains, will it only work if their chain supports light clients by its implementation support for the sc-sync-state-rpc crate (a light sync state extension) from the Polkadot SDK?
If a Non-System Parachain or Stand-alone Chain wants to fork the https://github.com/w3ux/w3ux-library repository using a branch "my-branch" and the https://github.com/polkadot-cloud/polkadot-staking-dashboard repository and change each import in the Polkadot Staking Dashboard repository to use the the relevant @w3ux workspace package in that branch using the latest Yarn 4.6.0 syntax, how would they do that so the dependencies get installed and transpiled correctly in their fork? For example, if they needed to import the "@w3ux/hooks" workspace package, would they importing it like this in the package.json file "@w3ux/hooks": "[email protected]:my-fork-repo/w3ux-library.git#head=my-branch&workspace=@w3ux/hooks"
, or would they need to rename anything to "@w3ux/hooks-source" to match the name of that workspace package?
In Section 3.1 of the Full Proposal https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tDo4D7tDabSDR9D8dAPkZcKB88NzyBQDu-Vx4w9gA_M/edit?tab=t.0, it says each of the two team members will be committing 25 hours per week, and in Section 2.1 it says that you'll be able to prioritize the most impactful features while remaining responsive to community feedback and user needs, and in Section 2.3 it says that your development approach prioritizes support. How many hours per week are allocated to mentoring the Polkadot Cloud Contribution Program?
In Section 4.3 Polkadot Cloud Contribution Program, it says that it only supports the Supported Repository: Polkadot Staking Dashboard. If the scope of the Polkadot Staking Dashboard remains contrained to only supporting Relay Chains and System Parachains, and other developers are required to fork the Polkadot Staking Dashboard to add those features for their individual Non-System parachain or Stand-alone chain (aka solo chain) that they share for others, but any pull requests that they make into the official Polkadot Staking Dashboard repository aren't reviewed or approved, will they be in any way eligible for the Polkadot Cloud Contribution Program?
In Section 4.4 it says "Throughout the project, we will maintain: Ongoing collaboration with Polkadot core developers.". How do you define a "Polkadot core developer"? How many hours per week go towards collaboration? Are those in the Polkadot Fellowship above a certain grade the only ones that are eligible for ongoing collaboration, whilst others are subject to adhoc collaboration?
@14rp4CvtyN3WSftrndyNxjJFi4cGXsgrE9gFr528QSYFvPTu — Thank you for your comprehensive feedback and support; it is much appreciated.
Dear @Ross and Joel | Polkadot Cloud,
Thank you for your proposal. Our vote on this proposal is AYE.
The Medium Spender track requires a 50% quorum and simple majority according to our voting policy. This proposal has received seven aye and zero nay votes from ten members. Below is a summary of our members' comments:
> The referendum received unanimous support, with members praising the proposer for responding to community feedback and presenting a well-structured, detailed proposal. The clear focus on staking, low budget of 82K, and outlined objectives, timeline, and team impressed voters. Members highlighted the proposal’s improvements over previous versions and expressed confidence in the team’s ability to deliver meaningful results.
The full discussion, along with individual members' votes and comments, can be found in our internal voting.
Kind regards,
Permanence DAO
Amazing Proposal and Very Timely
Staking will be the primary use case for the current ecosystem. The better our staking mechanism, the better the token’s price & community vibes.
100% support
@Nik 🫡
Amazing Proposal and Very Timely
Staking will be the primary use case for the current ecosystem. The better our staking mechanism, the better the token’s price & community vibes.
100% support
The Staking Dashboard is a crucial product for improving interactivity and is highly significant for the Polkadot ecosystem.
Polkadot Cloud has also consistently provided excellent products and services.
However, we’ve been trying to reach out to you on Element but haven’t received any response so far.😮💨
@TINY Thanks so much for the positive comments Tiny! I've set up a group chat in Element, let's discuss more there.
The Staking Dashboard is a crucial product for improving interactivity and is highly significant for the Polkadot ecosystem.
Polkadot Cloud has also consistently provided excellent products and services.
However, we’ve been trying to reach out to you on Element but haven’t received any response so far.😮💨
Powered by Subsocial