[Worker Proposal] Blockchain maintenance developer

[bitcrab]

thanks Dan.

[abit]

Please be aware that there are still 7,072,500 BTS unclaimed in this worker. I guess it's unused? So perhaps make some good use with it, or return it to the reserve pool?

[dannotestein]

Please be aware that there are still 7,072,500 BTS unclaimed in this worker. I guess it's unused? So perhaps make some good use with it, or return it to the reserve pool?

I'm aware of the unclaimed funds: I don't tend to forget such sums of money, especially when they've appreciated like BTS has since they were allocated. My intent for the usage of the funds remains unchanged from my previous statements about it: I'll draw upon them for work I think especially important to the future of the chain.

So far, I haven't had time to do much BitShares development work personally for a while due to commitments to other contracts, but that is changing soon. As a first step, recently I've begun reviewing the "state" of the project to determine areas where I think some work could be beneficially focused and also doing a small amount of contract work to customers interested in BitShares (the contract work was totally paid for by the customers and didn't involve changes to BitShares itself, so there was no reason to charge the maintenance funds for it). I won't be able to devote a large amount of my own time until my current commitments are completed (somewhere in next 2 to 6 months I hope), but I plan to involve some of our engineers in development work prior to that time (I introduced the guys to the concepts of UIAs, for example, yesterday).

One thing I would like to see now and would be willing to fund for a reasonable price from the allocated funds: an onchain or offchain solution to the bug where the vote counts aren't available for committee members that aren't presently elected. To me this seems like a distinct weakness in the governance system.

[Bangzi]

One thing I would like to see now and would be willing to fund for a reasonable price from the allocated funds: an onchain or offchain solution to the bug where the vote counts aren't available for committee members that aren't presently elected. To me this seems like a distinct weakness in the governance system.

True. Another issue is should proxy in DPOS work for 1 level or multiple levels? Please feel free to give your comment.
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/79

[abit]

I'm aware of the unclaimed funds: I don't tend to forget such sums of money, especially when they've appreciated like BTS has since they were allocated. My intent for the usage of the funds remains unchanged from my previous statements about it: I'll draw upon them for work I think especially important to the future of the chain.

... I plan to involve some of our engineers in development work prior to that time (I introduced the guys to the concepts of UIAs, for example, yesterday).

Thanks for the clarification and contributions.

One thing I would like to see now and would be willing to fund for a reasonable price from the allocated funds: an onchain or offchain solution to the bug where the vote counts aren't available for committee members that aren't presently elected. To me this seems like a distinct weakness in the governance system.

There is an github issue for this: https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/issues/987, actually I've got an idea about how to fix it just a few days before, although not yet started to code, due to priority. It's also good if someone else can get it fixed. However, IMHO, efforts related to this issue can be covered by the core dev worker if there isn't a dedicated bounty for it.

Back to the topic, 7 million BTS seems a bit too huge in comparison to such small bounties. Now we already have a core dev worker to cover the maintenance job which was intention of this worker. Since we haven't yet decided how to use this fund, given the fact that most workers on chain now are being paid via escrows, I propose that we move the remaining funds of this worker to be controlled by an escrow service (for example BBF) or merge it with the core dev worker, if we still want to use it to fund core development / maintenance. We do want experienced project manager and developers to help and contribute, not only funds. On the other hand, if we're going to use it to fund other things, which would be out of this worker's scope, IMHO it's best to re-vote.

[dannotestein]

Another issue is should proxy in DPOS work for 1 level or multiple levels? Please feel free to give your comment.
https://github.com/bitshares/bsips/issues/79

I left my comments on the issue.

[dannotestein]

Back to the topic, 7 million BTS seems a bit too huge in comparison to such small bounties. Now we already have a core dev worker to cover the maintenance job which was intention of this worker. Since we haven't yet decided how to use this fund, given the fact that most workers on chain now are being paid via escrows, I propose that we move the remaining funds of this worker to be controlled by an escrow service (for example BBF) or merge it with the core dev worker, if we still want to use it to fund core development / maintenance. We do want experienced project manager and developers to help and contribute, not only funds. On the other hand, if we're going to use it to fund other things, which would be out of this worker's scope, IMHO it's best to re-vote.

It's not my intent to use it for small bounties. I only mentioned that particular issue as I considered it of enough significance that I would be willing to fund it as I don't yet have time to assign someone to work on it.

The funds were originally assigned for BlockTrades to perform work it considered of sufficient importance based on my judgement. As such, I consider the funds mainly should still be allocated for such usage, unless I think there's a case where I decide someone can do something of high importance cheaper/easier.

I will not abuse the trust the original voters placed in my judgement by mis-using the funds. But IMO the funds should not be placed in someone else's control unless I make that decision without external pressure. And I would generally feel uncomfortable doing even that, because if I made the wrong decision, the funds could be abused and I would no longer be able to prevent it, so it would have to be someone I trusted at a level that I trust only a few people in this world. I hope you can understand my position on this.

If you feel that more funds need to be allocated to development at the current time, I suggest you create additional worker proposals and seek approval for the same. The great thing about BitShares is we do have an awesome system for polling the will of the holders, even if it has some flaws.

[sschiessl]

It is ready for grading, but later additions that are less integral to the lore correctness of this proposal are planned.

I don't understand what you are saying here, could you please elaborate?

[Digital Lucifer]

It is ready for grading, but later additions that are less integral to the lore correctness of this proposal are planned.

I don't understand what you are saying here, could you please elaborate?

It's a spam bot. I've been sending Fav PM's on Telegram but he has not removed it yet.

[fav]

It is ready for grading, but later additions that are less integral to the lore correctness of this proposal are planned.

I don't understand what you are saying here, could you please elaborate?

It's a spam bot. I've been sending Fav PM's on Telegram but he has not removed it yet.

use the report link please

[Digital Lucifer]

It is ready for grading, but later additions that are less integral to the lore correctness of this proposal are planned.

I don't understand what you are saying here, could you please elaborate?

It's a spam bot. I've been sending Fav PM's on Telegram but he has not removed it yet.

use the report link please

Hahaha, ok i'll raise blind

Done.