It has been over a year ago when the previous large upgrade grant passed. The App has been stable and useful, but doing nothing is going backwards in this fast moving world of crypto-currencies. So time to look at this again.
After quite some preparation work and some teasers I’m proud to present to you the draft custodial grant proposal to significantly improve the NuDroid App in a bid to increase the demand for NuBits. The proposal is split up in 5 sections;
Explanation and rationale; What is NuDroid and why this proposal?
Overview releases, time and costs;
Detailed description of releases.
The intention is to discuss and finalise the custodial grant in the next 10-14 days and bring up the final grant for voting thereafter. The amounts mentioned for the releases and the total amount are estimates based from a draft contract and subject to negotiation with the developer or myself. The item around changing the currency from NBT to US-NBT in NuDroid is still being worked on and may need to be added to the cost TBC. There is also an option to update the user interface presented at the bottom of the grant which hasn’t been included awaiting feedback.
I recognise that this is a significant investment for Nu. However I think it will eventually provide good value. I have tried to provide easy to read overviews and at the end of the proposal a detailed description of the functionality for those more technically oriented. The text under ‘Requirements’ will also be added in the contract.
It is quite a read, but a major release like this is likely only to happen once a year and given the size adequate due diligence is required. Thanks for your time and consideration.
The proposal can only be finalised and submitted for voting when a contract with the Developer and Custodian has been agreed. This leaves flexibility for feedback and comments to be taken into account.
I often need time to digest complex things.
This was just the first finding that struck me
Maybe I come back with more of that or even suggestions to improve it?
Not very likely, because the draft is already in an impressive shape!
Integrating Ethereum would be an excellent move judging by the current trend. It also would allow us to raise interest within the Ethereum community, especially since Vitalik has recently tweeted that most DAPPS would require some form of stablecoin to work. To be realistic, NuBits has been more or less ignored by the wider Bitcoin audience.
You might be right, but will need to have @MatthewLM to comment on it.
Anyway, the risk is that anything changed now might need to be revisited again when Nu 3.0 is released. I rather wait until it is more clear how that is going to look like and what changes might be required.
The implementation for dynamic fees as it stands was done to avoid implementing details to the Nu protocol in regards to fee calculations, which are indeed unknown for Nu 3.0 at this point in time. This was largely to make costs lower. The way NuDroid fetches fees should hopefully work with Nu 3.0 when it is released in the future, but to implement the logic from within the app itself, I would need to know the way Nu 3.0 will work.
I can add any new DNS seeds to the app during a release with no problem. Indeed it would make the app more resilient by having no single-point of failure. Though the app can do peer discovery without a DNS seed; it’s just much slower and more unreliable.
Just made a few changes to the proposal and I consider it now a final draft.
Renamed title to v5 April 2016
Removed optional material theme text from proposal.
Added release 1E which transitions from NBT to USNBT and has approach for change in Shapeshift.io api.
This results in an increase of the duration to 7 weeks (was 6) and total cost increase to 16,350 (was 15,350).
More details in the proposal.
As I have not seen any comments on the optional release for the Material theme I decided to leave it out in the final draft.
The intention is to release it for voting in the next few days, so please let me know if you still have some feedback or comments to improve it or just to support it.
There is no hourly rate. It is a negotiated fixed price proposal.
I’m currently finalising the contract with Matthew and make some final adjustments and submit it for voting if there are no other comments.
Impeding development saves some bucks, but prevents useful tools from being created.
I’d rather see an NSR sale than saving money here.
The liquidity operation costs a lot of money and there’s a lot of potential for saving, but that road isn’t followed seriously.
Why make cuts here instead?
This has the potential to increase adoption.