seems like committee is meeting here, but i am curious, is there a regular meeting by committee to discuss and review proposals and future of bitshares?

Also why has this proposal not been approved for so long?

At last, a sane account overview page. Good job!

+5%

Good to have a weekly report? In the beginning we can summarize a bit more frequently, after the process became stable, do less.

Quote from: abit on August 15, 2017, 03:33:49 PM

If we have more contributors like this, the worker fund may be not enough or be accumulating too slowly.

not a bad problem to have though

Here came a new developer submitting PR's.
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/pull/250
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/pull/255

If we have more contributors like this, the worker fund may be not enough or be accumulating too slowly.

What is the logic behind dates for milestones? https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-ui/milestones

Now I see 1 Sep, 14 Sep, 1 Oct ... wouldn't it be better for both dev team and community to have predictable sprints, e.g.  14-day long?

The most important thing is to identify priority of the jobs and to arrange resources according to the priority. That said, value of low priority jobs is near zero. We don't need to get everything done, but need to get the most important things done asap. Hope you will not disappoint us.

Quote from: bitcrab on August 13, 2017, 05:44:00 PM
surely we cannot expect volunteers to do the needed development just for free, we need to pay for valuable work, especially when capitals are looking for blockchain relevant developers with high salary all around the world.

I think alt's project and ICOWALLET's plan do worth worker proposals, so if necessary, do not hesitate to apply one, it will help the community to be aware and trace what you do.

I finally decided to vote up this worker. I know it is not perfect, but we need it.

Thank you for this approval and I trust it will not disappoint your community and shareholders

Quote from: bitcrab on August 13, 2017, 05:44:00 PM
surely we cannot expect volunteers to do the needed development just for free, we need to pay for valuable work, especially when capitals are looking for blockchain relevant developers with high salary all around the world.

I think alt's project and ICOWALLET's plan do worth worker proposals, so if necessary, do not hesitate to apply one, it will help the community to be aware and trace what you do.

I finally decided to vote up this worker. I know it is not perfect, but we need it.

Thank you for your approval bitcrab. I am glad we are finally spending to fund development and would happily support alt and icowallet worker as well.

surely we cannot expect volunteers to do the needed development just for free, we need to pay for valuable work, especially when capitals are looking for blockchain relevant developers with high salary all around the world.

I think alt's project and ICOWALLET's plan do worth worker proposals, so if necessary, do not hesitate to apply one, it will help the community to be aware and trace what you do.

I finally decided to vote up this worker. I know it is not perfect, but we need it.

Quote from: pluswave on August 13, 2017, 03:37:43 PMIn short, we need a better API lib layer to talk to backend first, then it is valuable to do a better reference UI .

Appreciate your work.
Not sure what you mean with "better" reference UI but it is imminent that we fix urgent bugs and UI elements now, simply because people have difficulties to navigate and use the wallet. Just waiting now and hoping for someone to built a better API-lib do harm our reputation and hinders user adoption.
Now is the time to work on multiple parts, even if we will rework the reference client in the future.
For example Cryptonomex is running a marketing campaign out of their own pocket but it does not make sense to target new users if we don't address the most urgent problems in the wallet now. We simply do not have a choice.

Not voting for motivated workers is in the end more expensive then "wasting" $1mil per year to maintain our infrastructure and dev teams.

I am the leader developer of ICOWallet team. From my point of view,  the ChainStore part of bitsharesjs is poorly designed so we need to replace with our own. The points are:

1 The return value of APIs of the form getXXXX  is a 'try and guess correct' thing (sync one), which should be replaced with  ( same form of ) promise apis.
2. The tests are incomplete and the code is hard to argue and review.
3. For the cache thing, we need some carefully designed mechanism to reduce the network throughput  . IMHO, if a fully api node can reduce the memory usage, then in theory , a smart phone is capable for a "reduced full api node" which is used only with concerned accounts. That is a big thing. But for now, we plan to do some small improvements: market data / account history with diff data on wire .  BitsharesUI has some code for diff data on wire for market data, it should be  in bitsharesjs. Also, we plan to use HTML5 storage like localstorage / indexedDB to save persistent data from blockchain. (For compatible with Nodejs, that is another story.)

And yes, I think there are two ways to improve the architecture which is more valuable now:

1. use and improve alt's backend, drop many components in bitsharesjs.
2. do something like the discussion in this post above to improve the bitsharejs lib to make it a better one.

with any direction done, we can then do a better UI but I think it will be much easier.

we don't plan to open-source the UI part for ICOWallet in the near future( but maybe 1 or 2 years later), but once we have improved the bitsharesjs lib , we will make it opensource. @bitcrab suggested us to apply a worker for this part, but I don't think we need so much work to apply a worker (I think the community will see a better lib in two months, however as we have some other works, it could be incomplete for a whole UI but it should be a good reference for community to work on). If anyone can do some "block to object generating" like in C++ part in javascript, that is a valuable worker proposal (the big thing mentioned above).

In short, we need a better API lib layer to talk to backend first, then it is valuable to do a better reference UI .

I support the bounty program. Lets get this proposal approved!

Quote from: bitcrab on August 12, 2017, 04:07:48 PM
today I have discussed with ICOWALLET team, they plan to

1.adpot alt's infrastructure
2.update bitsharesjs

to improve the performance, as they said, updating bitsharesjs can also imporve the performance greatly.

seems these 2 ways are currently what we can do to get the needed wallet performance, surely more highly configured API servers are also needed, good news is that there are also new contributors for this, wss://bitshares.wancloud.io/ws is provided by wancloud, a branch of WANXIANG Group. this is a good beginning.

maybe because of culture difference, developers from China seldom like to create worker proposal. but many times it is good to create a worker proposal for your work, not only for getting paid, but also to expose your work to public, to let all know what are you doing, this is helpful to keep the development community healthy.

I'll ask the ICOwallet team to explain their plan for updatting bitsharesjs, the goal, and also the estimatted workload.

maybe a worker will be created for this.

I feel it's also well for alt to create a worker for the new infrastructure development, however if he does not hate to do so.

I feel @wmbutler 's idea for linking issue with bounty is ok, if it can be managed well, let's try it?

Just .. thank you ..  for taking all the time and write this down!!! +5%

My only minor concern is that bitsharesjs should imho still be compatible with regular witness node apis and have a proper fall back mechanism ..

today I have discussed with ICOWALLET team, they plan to

1.adpot alt's infrastructure
2.update bitsharesjs

to improve the performance, as they said, updating bitsharesjs can also imporve the performance greatly.

seems these 2 ways are currently what we can do to get the needed wallet performance, surely more highly configured API servers are also needed, good news is that there are also new contributors for this, wss://bitshares.wancloud.io/ws is provided by wancloud, a branch of WANXIANG Group. this is a good beginning.

maybe because of culture difference, developers from China seldom like to create worker proposal. but many times it is good to create a worker proposal for your work, not only for getting paid, but also to expose your work to public, to let all know what are you doing, this is helpful to keep the development community healthy.

I'll ask the ICOwallet team to explain their plan for updatting bitsharesjs, the goal, and also the estimatted workload.

maybe a worker will be created for this.

I feel it's also well for alt to create a worker for the new infrastructure development, however if he does not hate to do so.

I feel @wmbutler 's idea for linking issue with bounty is ok, if it can be managed well, let's try it?