Sat. Jun 19th, 2021
    DevEx#29, Free TON, Meetup

    The meetup participants discussed whether the DeBot module should be supported in the SDK, the payment of vesting for SDK work, and how to avoid misinterpretation of contest terms. They also found out what’s next for the past DeNS contest and debated whether a new contest to design a separate site for developers is needed.

    DeBot Module Support In SDK

    Ekaterina Pantaz clarified whether contestants should support the DeBot module inside the SDK while it is unstable. Although she also noted that the majority supports it, and only a couple of people do not. And to promote DeBots, Ekaterina believes it is a must.

    In the vote, the majority decided that support is necessary.

    Ekaterina Pantaz promised to share this decision with all participants.

    Payment Of Vestings For SDK Work

    The contestant under the nickname Nerzh Woodcrust did not update the product in time and as a result did not get vesting, as according to him, he was initially misled. The question is: what to do in this situation, whether to pay him the vesting and how to avoid similar cases in the future?

    Alexey Novikov pointed out that the general trend across all Subgovernances is to accept the conditions of the contests in general terms without proper detailing and analysis of how these conditions may be understood by different participants. “I explain this, of course, not by our laziness, but by everyone’s heavy load. As a result, the conditions of the contest can be interpreted in different ways, and people get used to the fact that the written terms are interpreted not by the letter, but with common sense, some sort of concept, which may be different for each person… So people simply trust less in what is written, and trust more in what we say: they prefer to ask and stick to the version they have heard verbally”.

    This is exactly what happened in this situation: Nerzh Woodcrust asked Alexander Nazarov if it would be possible to delay updating the module because he was very busy with work, and there was no urgent need for the module. Alexander Nazarov allowed it (having previously agreed with the DevEx SG participants), although this contradicts what is written in the terms of the contest, and promised that in a month the vesting would still be paid.

    Ekaterina Pantaz clarified that the period between commits was quite large: from December 9 to May 9. The terms have not been met and, in her opinion, payment cannot be made.

    Alexey Novikov decided that in preparation of the vesting to the participants, he will also make a separate proposal for a conflicting payment, the initiative group members will vote and eventually, there will be a collective decision at the Subgovernance: “If not to vote, then it is our collective decision. The submission will be processed and will not fall into oblivion or emptiness. We as Subgovernance will show that we make decisions and act on them”.

    Pavel P pointed out that to avoid disputes on the lack of clarity, it is necessary to follow everything that is written in the terms of the contest: “And that is why you need to write short and brief, and the terms should be interpreted with common sense… You can overcomplicate it to infinity, to come up with different interpretations. But I am against confusing people”.

    By the way, if the contestants wish, they can come to any meetup (meet up, AMA) and learn all the nuances of this or that contest topic, including a rather complicated — ZKP.

    DeNS Solution: What’s Next

    Recently there was a record short DeNS contest (6.5 days to decide and 3 days to judge). Of the nine appointed judges, five voted. Some didn’t make it, some didn’t get their thoughts together and didn’t know how to vote, some weren’t there. What will happen to DeNS next?

    Mitja reported that TON Labs is getting ready to deploy. He also said that initially there was only one TON Labs employee in the contest, but when they needed to create a production-ready solution, that’s when they teamed up with RSquad, taking SMV from them. Although they had to review the architecture, to make changes to it, but in the allotted time for the contest, they did not have time to complete it. However, the work received good feedback from the judges at the end, so now changes are actively being made and everything is being completed.

    Mitja also added that the community voting with a Governance token, which will allow voting for a list of predefined reserved names, is scheduled to launch next week. The question — who to distribute these tokens will be made in a separate proposal on the forum. For now, Mitja’s suggestion is to give out a certain amount to each Subgovernance, which will distribute them among its members.

    When Ivan asked if there was a mechanism for regular reservation of tokens, Mitja answered in the affirmative, “SMV will always be running. You can always put it up for a new vote from the SMV, and once it’s voted for, it will automatically drop into that list at the end of the contest. This is if the domain is not registered. If it is already registered, then that’s it”. Pavel P summarized that in this way, at the time of making the proposal, the name should be blocked.

    Proposal: Contest For A Website For Developers

    Pavel P suggested a contest to create a website for developers, where people can under any type of task to make their website, which will then simplify the solution.

    Pavel P: “TON Labs is obviously torn, and so far I hear from all sides that there is not enough documentation, that maybe someone will make DeBots separately… I.e. there are many topics, everyone has a different approach… A very large stack, people can take some understandable segment for clear use cases and make a website for developers with a focus on this direction”.

    Alexey Novikov was skeptical about the proposal, because, in his opinion, Wikipedia is enough, and in addition, there is a Subgovernance for developer training, as well as if you want you can read the full documentation on the TON Dev.

    Also, Alexey suggested people should write on resources such as, Hacker Noon, and then pay them for quality material on public sites. In addition, Free TON feeds will appear there, and other developers from related fields will see the pop-up ads and hints and will click on them. “This way, by publishing on shared resources, we will attract people from related blockchain projects”.

    Pavel P reminded participants that, a growing news project that would not exist without this contest, resulted from a blog contest that once took place. “Paying money for articles is a bad story”, says Pavel P. “And the reward for whoever comes up with the site is a bonus… Encouraging people to make their website about development and blogs about development is the idea”.

    Alexander Khramtsov added it would be nice if the useful information that passes in the chats was stored somewhere because if needed, it is impossible to find it in a large flow of messages. Alexander also admitted that, for example, he misses Stack Overflow.

    Pavel P promised he would think about everything again, pay special attention to Stack Overflow, and later provide a detailed proposal.

    In Addition

    Ivan said he had heard that developers were worried about the constant multiplication of codes in wallet contracts and wondered if there was any way to keep them in one place, as well as what use case instructions to get initial code.

    Mitja objected it doesn’t bother at all, and just reduces the wallet, and in addition, some checks can’t be done without it. “We’re now changing the node, the format of the address, and the account — also so that the contract can get the initial hash of its account code”, said Mitja. “For example, you can freeze an account, it’s all gone, and then unfreeze it and set code another one in it. And then the check that your account has been deployed by someone will not pass.

    If you want to make a system where the code could only be hashed from a particular other wallet, account (for example, another root), so that no one spammed the indexes, the only way to check this is if you had an initial hash code written in that account, so you can’t do this approach”.

    Pavel P noted this topic is quite interesting, and it is great that it was raised.