Detalhes da Proposta
Budget Guardrail: Core Budget Proposals Require 2 Contributors Each
collin_mav100
Resumo
For any Core Budget Proposal designed to improve core aspects of the Cardano Blockchain we must hire at least 2 companies to work cooperatively on each proposal. Any core bucket budget proposal must contain more than one entity with developers who will have full access to repos used to develop the project subject.
Motivação
We need more developers who are able to develop the core functionality on this blockchain. This is a key weakness right now that IOHK is really the center of core development on this blockchain. Any company or community that develops products/applications that include production code recognizes that you need cross-pollination between teams. The Tribal knowledge problem has already caused problems with key programmers leaving unsupported projects in this system. We need to decentralize this code creation pipeline.
Additionally this creates a natural auditing function for each proposal. If there are 2 or more separate entities on a proposal we will get reviews of all party efforts in each proposal from the other parties.
This will create a chance to create a solid auditing system. Once we have enough capable entities we can create a serious auditing system that random selects/rotates through entities. I would create 3 levels of Core Development entities which would boil down to Apprentice/Journeyman/Master. New development groups will need to go through an apprenticeship period. Groups that succeed and get positive reviews from partners can become journeyman entities. After a period of years a group could go to master status. This would allow us to create an auditing system to support DApp developers on this chain.
Justificativa
A core principle in this ecosystem is decentralization and we need to decentralize development of the core functionality on this blockchain.
A core principle we believe in is trustlessness. This proposal creates a built in auditing system.
Links de apoio
Registre seu Voto
Comentários (17)
I see the potential of the idea and generally support the "four eye principle" as it fosters due diligence and helps to reduce sloppiness. However, there's an issue with decentralization and the ease somebody can circumvent the requirement by pretending to be two companies or just hiring a stand-in. The proposal needs more work to reflect a true "four eye principle" where a separate party would function as auditor.
I see the direction to keep security of the funds... This needs fleshing out more... would there be a 3rd entity that can over see the auditing system ?
Doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
20%
Please take a look through the Comprehensive Annual Budget Process within the Intersect Budget Committee: https://committees.docs.intersectmbo.org/v/intersect-budget-committee/a-comprehensive-annual-budget-process-for-decentralized-governance
Two companies can easily override this measure by claiming to work together on paper, but not really auditing each other. We could force companies to deposit 10% of the quantity they ask for, and give them partial quantities over time.
My concern is that "we must hire at least 2 companies to work cooperatively on each proposal" can be checked off by two firms teaming up (formally but not really). I would like to see copious proof this works better in real life.
This could be required potentially in the future but I agree with @cerkoryn, core development is still in IOG's lap currently. I do love the idea of 3 levels of certification Apprentice/Journeyman/Master and how it would mature over time
Would a 3rd quality control entity be beneficial and have consistent updates.
I agree. Unfortunately at the moment, core node developent is still an IOG silo. There needs to be cross-polination and knowledge transfer.
Good thinking, is there a way of creating incentives for teams to team up, instead of forcing it?
Most progress is made in small teams with high cohesion and experience working together. This proposal will force reduction in efficiency, by forcing teams who are not "a team" by definition to work together. This usually doesn't have good outcomes.
Você está pronto para participar?
Construindo juntos para impulsionar a Cardano.