SwarmNL milestone 2 revision

sacha-l commented 2 months ago

Project Abstract

This is a revision to Milestone 2 for building SwarmNl, previously stipulated here: https://github.com/w3f/Grants-Program/pull/2201.

Grant level

[ ] Level 1: Up to $10,000, 2 approvals
[ ] Level 2: Up to $30,000, 3 approvals
[x] Level 3: Unlimited, 5 approvals (for >$100k: Web3 Foundation Council approval)

Application Checklist

[x] The application template has been copied and aptly renamed (project_name.md).
[x] I have read the application guidelines.
[x] Payment details have been provided (Polkadot AssetHub (DOT, USDC & USDT) address in the application and bank details via email, if applicable).
[x] I understand that an agreed upon percentage of each milestone will be paid in vested DOT, to the Polkadot address listed in the application.
[x] I am aware that, in order to receive a grant, I (and the entity I represent) have to successfully complete a KYC/KYB check.
[x] The software delivered for this grant will be released under an open-source license specified in the application.
[x] The initial PR contains only one commit (squash and force-push if needed).
[x] The grant will only be announced once the first milestone has been accepted (see the announcement guidelines).
[x] I prefer the discussion of this application to take place in a private Element/Matrix channel. My username is: @sacha-lansky:matrix.org

sacha-l commented 2 months ago

Thank you for taking the time to review @takahser.

The way we calculated things for Milestone 2 was indeed $2k per FTE, calculated at an hourly rate of $40 USD/hour at a 40 hour week. In this revision we have increased the hourly rate to $60 USD.

Upon completing Milestone 1, I realized we had significantly miscalculated the projected allocation of resources and cost. Namely:

I realized that the level of complexity and protocol development the work entails merits more than a $40 per hour salary. Just by looking at around at rates for similar work being anywhere between 80 and 120, feel the increase to 60 is a reasonable middle ground.
The single FTE was calculated to include both our hours, i.e. 10 hours of Project Management, writing tests, writing docs etc. + 30 hours dedicated to development. Both roles turned out to be equally important, each taking an equal amount of time, which turned out to be a lot more than 40 hour weeks. In my role for example I spent a lot more time writing code. Deji spent a lot of time on docs and guides. We basically became one unit. In this revision for Milestone 2, we are trying to be more realistic on the amount of effort we realize will be needed to deliver to the best of our abilities which is why we now have 1.5 FTE (putting my commitment at 20 hours a week and Deji's at 40 hours).
We realized the importance of research and testing and I hadn't anticipated this well. Our M1 delivery was projected on 6 weeks, but it actually took us 8. This is why in this revision we've allocated 2 weeks for research in M2.1; 2 weeks for review, testing and improvements in M2.2 + 2 more weeks for integration testing and benchmarking (which is tricky!) and 2 more weeks for testing and touching things up in the final deliverable, "Extendability of library". This is also why there's an increase in time

Overall, we adjusted the hourly rate to $60 and adjusted the projected workload to be more realistic based on the experience we had shipping M1. Hope this helps clarify.

semuelle commented 2 months ago

Hi @sacha-l, thanks for clarifying. Since your initial application, we have started paying out grants with a percentage in DOT (vested over two years). Would you be comfortable with switching to 50% DOT going forward?

sacha-l commented 2 months ago

Hi @semuelle - can you provide more details on what that means ? What are the advantages of receiving DOT vested over two years?

semuelle commented 2 months ago

It means, part of the payment is in DOT tokens and linearly unlocks over the span of two years. We have incorporated 50%+ vested DOT payments to incentivise grant recipients to participate in the ecosystem beyond the grant payout. See also https://wiki.polkadot.network/docs/learn-transactions#vested-transfers and https://grants.web3.foundation/docs/faq#what-does-it-mean-for-payments-to-be-at-least-50-dot.

In your case, if you choose 50% DOT, for M2, you would get 18,000 USD in fiat or stablecoin, and the remaining 18,000 USD as DOT, where each block on the network unlocks a small portion for two years.

sacha-l commented 2 months ago

Hi @semuelle - After carefully considering the locked DOT payment opportunity, we decided we would happily accept switching to this model going forward.

thewoodfish commented 2 months ago

Hi @semuelle - After carefully considering the locked DOT payment opportunity, we decided we would happily accept switching to this model going forward.

It means, part of the payment is in DOT tokens and linearly unlocks over the span of two years. We have incorporated 50%+ vested DOT payments to incentivise grant recipients to participate in the ecosystem beyond the grant payout. See also https://wiki.polkadot.network/docs/learn-transactions#vested-transfers and https://grants.web3.foundation/docs/faq#what-does-it-mean-for-payments-to-be-at-least-50-dot.

In your case, if you choose 50% DOT, for M2, you would get 18,000 USD in fiat or stablecoin, and the remaining 18,000 USD as DOT, where each block on the network unlocks a small portion for two years.

Thank you @semuelle , we think this is a great model that works. It will also help us further build and test our next project easily on the Polkadot network which we absolutely intend to do, in great style.

sacha-l commented 2 months ago

Thanks for your reply @Noc2. We would be happy to discount our hours for this milestone push by 20%, which would bring the total cost to $28,800.00. With this we would request that we get the amount in USDC instead of locked DOT. Would that work on your end?

sacha-l commented 1 month ago

Sorry for the delay here. At this stage, we need to follow the new rule: "At least 50% of any grant is paid out in vested DOT." and can not easily accept application that don't take vested DOTs.

Understood. We would be happy to stick to the original plan and get more reviews from the committee in that case. If for some reason you advise against this, I would like to understand what the committee's reasoning might be. If this might be the case and because we just really want to get to work on shipping milestone 2, we would reduce some of the scope to keep it within the 30k tier.

thewoodfish commented 1 month ago

Thank you very much @sacha-l, we patiently await your feedback @Noc2. Thank you.

keeganquigley commented 1 month ago

Thanks @sacha-l just to confirm, you want to use the same Polkadot address for both USDC & DOT payments?

sacha-l commented 1 month ago

Thanks @sacha-l just to confirm, you want to use the same Polkadot address for both USDC & DOT payments?

Yes we will use the same address for locked DOT payments and USDC. But we will use a different address than the last milestone payment. The address will be: 14pG7HieCjNk2hZ4X2YvxkbpAXs9oCeW8aNZcD7tD2tpaJT9

Has the committee come to a conclusion ?

keeganquigley commented 1 month ago

Thanks @sacha-l in that case, could you please update the Polkadot address at the top of the application as part of this commit? Since the address in the application has to match the one on the invoice. After that I'm willing to approve it myself, and then I can ping the other committee members again.

sacha-l commented 1 month ago

Thank you for your time. I have updated the address in the latest commit.

keeganquigley commented 1 month ago

Thanks @sacha-l can you also change the level from 2 to 3? Sorry I should have mentioned that also.

sacha-l commented 1 month ago

Hi @semuelle thanks for you comment. To clarify, we would be happy to go forward with the original plan and accept locked DOT.

semuelle commented 1 month ago

Hi @semuelle thanks for you comment. To clarify, we would be happy to go forward with the original plan and accept locked DOT.

Great to hear. In that case, could you please add a DOT %: 50% (or more) under the Costs line?

thewoodfish commented 1 month ago

Hi @semuelle thanks for you comment. To clarify, we would be happy to go forward with the original plan and accept locked DOT.

Great to hear. In that case, could you please add a DOT %: 50% (or more) under the Costs line?

Hello @semuelle, we have made the changes requested. We look forward to your response. Thank you

thewoodfish commented 3 weeks ago

@takahser @semuelle @Noc2 we have gone ahead to make all the changes you requested. We anticipate your approval. Thank you very much.

takahser commented 3 weeks ago

@thewoodfish thx for the reminder. I just commented.

thewoodfish commented 3 weeks ago

@thewoodfish thx for the reminder. I just commented.

Always a pleasure ser! @sacha-l has made the change. I look forward to your response. Thank you!

thewoodfish commented 3 weeks ago

Thank you very much @semuelle and @Noc2. We patiently await your approval @takahser. Thank you.

w3f / Grants-Program