Menu
What's new

Archived PIVX Core Development Feb-Apr - Liquid369

L

Liquid369

Administrator
Code: 
Name: PIVX Core Development
Terms: 3 Cycles
Cycle Amt: 30,000 PIV
Total Amt: 90,000 PIV
Author: Liquid369
Receiver: Liquid369
Address: DRu74zzUDq9bfdRBZWfkZAw3tUysRvdvJG
Created: 01-25-2023
Status: Proposal
Vote Hash: a3adfe7dc00058077a671912bf7b5dc2e7a8865720ac1b5621b569a1b48f8304



Hello Pivian’s

This proposal is in regard to moving forward with PIVX Core Development with the focus on several key things alongside more discussions with the community on what is the order to achieve afterward. The following is the outline of what's done and is being done in regard to PIVX Core Development. There is a need for more involvement in the PIVX Development process that I can assist with. This overview is the scope of what I have in mind to work on. This proposal is outlining compensation for myself.

What will this proposal bring, and how will it be executed?

- Assisting PIVX Core Development
- Assistance in maintaining Repositories in PIVX-Project Organization
- Research regarding the current status of 6.0
- Allowing IPv4 and IPv6 capability to version 6.0
- Finalizing 6.0 release aka “DMN”
- Overviewing current code for various fixes and needs to be resolved during the 6.0 process
- Reviewing code submissions by various contributors before being merged into PIVX
- Use case development
- Adoption forward thinking
- New Roadmap discussions
- Purchasing hardware needed for ledger testing


What have I done so far?

- Code reviews to push forward v5.5
- Contributed to building and releasing v5.5
- Assisting PIVX Labs
- Worked on several payment processors, now needing to be configured for PIVX
- Being a developer available for Support in discord
- Assisted in providing data to various exchanges/amas for accuracy and technical mindset
- Started up a Test network with the team to evaluate current DMN processes
- Worked on bug resolution already found with Alessandro in regard to DMN creation/starting
- Reconfigured test network for better/easier testing
- Researching new ways to implement/adjust the current DMN/6.0 system for ipv4/6


Vote:​
Code: 
mnbudgetvote many a3adfe7dc00058077a671912bf7b5dc2e7a8865720ac1b5621b569a1b48f8304 yes
Code: 
mnbudgetvote many a3adfe7dc00058077a671912bf7b5dc2e7a8865720ac1b5621b569a1b48f8304 no
 
Last edited:
I'd still like to see a more transparent breakdown of exactly where funds are being distributed to and how they are being used. You've done a good job of notating your own personal contributions, but this proposal looks to cover multiple people (a team)?, but that is not entirely clear either (you mention myself and Alessandro in one bullet point, but it is unclear if either of us are funds recipients from this proposal)
 
Alessandro should be submitting a separate proposal through Labs, as I outlined by the end with the compensation of the proposal being to myself vs the original one
Sorry for the confusion and will update accordingly
 
This comment doesn't just apply to this proposal. Also, I realize this proposal is mostly for PIVX-Core, but I am expecting you will be contributing to other repos too?

In the past, the 'main' development was for PIVX-Core only. One of the ways the Core Devs provided feedback, was by connecting GitHub to the #github-updates channel. I know that there are a bunch of new repos now. Perhaps it is time to setup a category called 'GitHub Updates' and then have separate channels under that for each repo? Then we would be able to automatically keep up with how much effort you and others are putting into other repos too.
 
Hello,
why the proposal link goes to some strange Facebook page? Maybe URL shortening should not be allowed.
 
paulito said:
Hello,
why the proposal link goes to some strange Facebook page? Maybe URL shortening should not be allowed.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, links to proposals in this forum can get quite long, and exceed the max allowed by the PIVX Proposal submission functionality in the Core Wallet. As such, most times, a 'Short URL' service is required. Turns out that the short URL service this proposal has an expiry on the life of the URL before it is recycled. The proposal author is aware of this now, and will use a different service next time.

This all came about, because Bit.ly made it look like you had to register to use their service, even though it doesn't. Rightly so - the proposal author didn't want to have to do any kind of KYC at all, and decided to try a new service.
 
All Labs-submitted proposals are designed to be used without the need of URL shortening (check out any of the "LMPs" or "LRPs", all of them use native forum URLs).
It's worth considering this approach, as it eradicates third-parties from the Proposer <---> Voter.
 
PIVX Labs said:
All Labs-submitted proposals are designed to be used without the need of URL shortening (check out any of the "LMPs" or "LRPs", all of them use native forum URLs).
It's worth considering this approach, as it eradicates third-parties from the Proposer <---> Voter.
Click to expand...
Yes. But, short names (and therefore short URLs) are not very descriptive. I don't think you can have identically named proposals in the system either. Plus people get confused if you just add 'V2' and 'V3' etc to the following 'renewed' proposals, so you end up adding dates or date ranges, or year/quarters. It becomes an issue. Your turn will come. :)

Long term, to avoid confusion and add clarity, we need to increase the max URL size in the Core wallet, or change how the forum creates links, or use a 3rd party URL shortener. Of course, the last option is the easiest. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top