BitShares Forum
Main => Stakeholder Proposals => Topic started by: startail on March 11, 2020, 06:56:19 pm
-
The team from last years worker of the Bitshares UI are happy to present a new worker proposal for 2020.
Read the full proposal here (https://www.bitshares.foundation/workers/2020-03-bitshares-ui)
The decreased price have made us reform this years worker much compared to last years.
To just name a few (read the full proposal for a better understanding)
- There is no travel expenses for attending events
- A decreased time in administration to focus on development
- An agreed upon committed development time by each developer
- A three part roadmap for the period of the worker
- A decreased time period, only 6 months
With this post we, the entire team, seeks the community feedback and support.
Regards Magnus
Assigned team leader
What is the intention of the BitShares UI?
The BitShares UI is often called the Reference UI. And it seeks to be exactly that: A reference that seeks to showcase any and all features that the BitShares Blockchain offers. Easily onboarded, forked and branded. The idea is that gateways or business have an easy entry-point and to be able to give them sample code on how to interact with the blockchain. The idea was not to provide a simple, slick, use-case targeted UI for depicted target groups like traders.
Anyone should be able to get a grasp on the feature set while being able to quickly try things out. The user experience is of course always one key driver for development of the BitShares UI, but it will never be as simply or focused as a tailored UI with a specific use-case in mind.
-
Personally was involved in draft overview for this worker through period of last 4 months while team was collaborating and crafting it accordingly to the blockchain/user needs and tighter worker rules by holders made in 2019:
- lower hourly rates
- more specific/detailed roadmap
- clear focus
- BTS payouts with choice of currency
- 6 months period.
Now, to not be confused, worker is asking for mere 107k USD as a MAX budget for 6 months. There is no lower than this, and its even lower than BTSPP worker.
Even though BTSPP is doing amazing job as a mobile trading app for the blockchain, its far from demo showcase for all our blockchain utilities and it doesn't support desktop version.
Holders, please reconsider your actions and vote on this much needed worker.
As a worker supporter, mini-proxy and core liaison - Supported!
Chee®s
-
I generally support the new UI worker and the team behind it, however I do have one concern:
Something I would like to see, in addition to the offering, is added budget for 6 month commitment - beyond the contract period - for a single developer to perform code review ONLY on community submitted PR's. This would be only for continuity's sake; in the event that there is another lapse in full "UI dev team" funding.
Those with control of the github repo generally slow down and do nothing unless they are being funded; which is understandable as they are not paid. However, that inaction drags down any ability for pro bono work to continue. Then since there is no pro bono work... we must fund the new "dev team" ...or get nothing. That negative feedback loop is frustrating and invokes a sense of conflict of interest.
It is untenable to have a buggy UI representing Bitshares with pull requests open by the public in the time lapsing between funding efforts.
I support this worker, but I also support a "no lapse community code review" addendum.
(https://imgur.com/HMN46J4.png)
-
I generally support the new UI worker and the team behind it, however I do have one concern:
Something I would like to see, in addition to the offering, is added budget for 6 month commitment - beyond the contract period - for a single developer to perform code review ONLY on community submitted PR's. This would be only for continuity's sake; in the event that there is another lapse in full "UI dev team" funding.
Those with control of the github repo generally slow down and do nothing unless they are being funded; which is understandable as they are not paid. However, that inaction drags down any ability for pro bono work to continue. Then since there is no pro bono work... we must fund the new "dev team" ...or get nothing. That negative feedback loop is frustrating and invokes a sense of conflict of interest.
It is untenable to have a buggy UI representing Bitshares with pull requests open by the public in the time lapsing between funding efforts.
I support this worker, but I also support a "no lapse community code review" addendum.
(https://imgur.com/HMN46J4.png)
Love the idea, but would be creating it as separate worker with limit-budget every 6 months.
If the regular UI is not voted in that one can always serve as a replacement to keep UI up-to-date for community efforts and releases.
Chee®s
-
Worker is now posted on chain with worker ID 1.14.256.
Public accounting is available as always (https://workers.bitshares.foundation/202003-bitshares-ui)
-
Worker is now posted on chain with worker ID 1.14.256.
Public accounting is available as always (https://workers.bitshares.foundation/202003-bitshares-ui)
Personally supported.
BEOS support since 1 hour ago.
Thanks for all compromises made, time and effort you spent on preparing this worker and dealing with me through it. Good luck to all the teams in upcoming workers and deliveries.
Chee®s
-
Thanks Digital Lucifer, and thanks for all your input and suggestions.
Looking forward in making new improvements and enhancements to the bitshares ecosystem together :)
-
Support! May the BitShares UI go to new strengths with this refined budget, and full focus on essential development.
-
Complaints on white screen issue seem to be increasing, tied to greater number of offline nodes.
Maintenance would be needed urgently
-
Support!
-
The bitshares-ui repository on Github has received many new issue reports since the project was left out of funds last year.
Maintenance of the UI is urgently needed.
Unfortunately the worker still lacks support for funding, and no major work will take place until then.
-
What are currently the most urgent updates bitshares UI need ?
-
What are currently the most urgent updates bitshares UI need ?
I would say bug fixes, auto reconnect and UX refinements.
-
Any estimates how much it would cost to just get the most urgent done ?
-
Any estimates how much it would cost to just get the most urgent done ?
Depends how you define urgent. Node connectivity seems to be a prominent issue.
-
Any estimates how much it would cost to just get the most urgent done ?
Depends how you define urgent. Node connectivity seems to be a prominent issue.
The concern is UI team fail to identify what need to be done and how much the budget.
The Core worker have list down what need to be done and maximum hours for each BSIPs.
-
Any estimates how much it would cost to just get the most urgent done ?
Depends how you define urgent. Node connectivity seems to be a prominent issue.
The concern is UI team fail to identify what need to be done and how much the budget.
The Core worker have list down what need to be done and maximum hours for each BSIPs.
Quite different situation. Please read the UI worker proposal, intention is laid out there.
Core is following BSIPs, second step is to make UI compatible to the changes / new features of core 4.0
-
Any estimates how much it would cost to just get the most urgent done ?
Depends how you define urgent. Node connectivity seems to be a prominent issue.
The concern is UI team fail to identify what need to be done and how much the budget.
The Core worker have list down what need to be done and maximum hours for each BSIPs.
Quite different situation. Please read the UI worker proposal, intention is laid out there.
Core is following BSIPs, second step is to make UI compatible to the changes / new features of core 4.0
Nobody like to pay for something without knowing the price and actual product/result. If someone create a worker proposal say Make Bitshares Great Again with 1 Million BTS/Day, who want to vote for it?
UI team more like self oriented (Pay me and I fix any small random bugs and develop some new features from Core) and BTS++ team more focus on community need(Features that highly demanded now and Bugs that blocking users having good user experience). If UI team fail to learn from BTS++ team, then nothing will change.
-
Nobody like to pay for something without knowing the price and actual product/result. If someone create a worker proposal say Make Bitshares Great Again with 1 Million BTS/Day, who want to vote for it?
UI team more like self oriented (Pay me and I fix any small random bugs and develop some new features from Core) and BTS++ team more focus on community need(Features that highly demanded now and Bugs that blocking users having good user experience). If UI team fail to learn from BTS++ team, then nothing will change.
Oh，CN-VOTE will vote for it if someone create a worker proposal say Make Bitshares Great Again with 1 Million BTS/Day，they have voted fulltime what and MM？
If BTS++ was so suitable, why BTS++ didn't charge the UI team? I think BTS++ can develop app and UI together.
If the community want a big change for UI? en, pay the money!
There have several UI teams in the past，but seems the community didn't fund enough money to finish the development.
-
UI team more like self oriented (Pay me and I fix any small random bugs and develop some new features from Core) and BTS++ team more focus on community need(Features that highly demanded now and Bugs that blocking users having good user experience). If UI team fail to learn from BTS++ team, then nothing will change.
The approach from BTS++ team and UI team was/is quite different. BTS++ does private discussions and management to define what they do next. Advantage is that they seek proactive feedback (and also get it because they are included in chinese community), disadvantage is that there is no transparency whatsoever to the outsider (not even I would know where to look).
The UI team has done everything managed publicly through the GitHub repository (https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui). The advantage is full transparency and accountability, and also a public well-defined development cycle. The disadvantage is that it was expected that the community gives feedback by opening an issue in the repository (it was always open for all, anything that I have seen I have created an issue mostly myself).
In that sense, BTS++ collects private feedback proactively, and UI team collects public feedback passive (proactive for anything that I saw). So in that sense I strongly disagree with your statement I quoted above, especially since the current worker proposal addresses your concerns.
-
Did have any new update for new version？
-
Did have any new update for new version？
The UI worker proposal was not activated, so no funding has been committed to further UI development to the benefit of hackers. Why would you think it's in development without funding?
-
Did have any new update for new version？
The UI worker proposal was not activated, so no funding has been committed to further UI development to the benefit of hackers. Why would you think it's in development without funding?
Seems cn-vote control the fund，but they can get money with other way… the income of wittness and MM.
-
Did have any new update for new version？
The UI worker proposal was not activated, so no funding has been committed to further UI development to the benefit of hackers. Why would you think it's in development without funding?
Seems cn-vote control the fund，but they can get money with other way… the income of wittness and MM.
Make money another way then donate their time for UI development? That's simply not realistic. Pay for UI development if you want it.