glad to see this.
in my view current core team do a good job, the main concern from the community is the high salary, and we also need to review the process.
if we want to build a more open and competitive core development infrastructure, we need to consider some points:
1.should the worker base on time or stage/project?
I feel it's better to organize the work base on stage, say, at this moment, community decide what features need to be included in the next hard fork, "core team" estimate the work load and schedule the work and create a worker for approval accordingly. the worker only cover the work for the selected features in this cycle, after that community will decide the next round of new features for "core team" to finish. possibly different stage different teams are selected to do the development.
2.
one fact is that the BSIP author is not always member of "core team", theoretically anyone can draft BSIP and is chosen by voting, if finally the BSIP is voted and implemented, the BSIP author should also be paid from the core worker.
3. if one team is voted for core development, how can we guarantee the smooth transition of the management of the project repo? any supervision is needed?
Topic: [Worker Proposal] BitShares Core Team Worker Proposal from Graphene Lab (Read 22452 times)
