-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Some proposed tweaks #10
Changes from 1 commit
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -11,20 +11,21 @@ requires: 1890 | |
--- | ||
|
||
## Simple Summary | ||
Add `0.044 ETH` per block for 18 months as a developer block reward reserved for funding Ethereum1.X development. | ||
Add `0.044 ETH` per block for 18 months as a developer block reward reserved for funding Ethereum 1.X development. | ||
|
||
Currently, EIP 1890 is a proposal for a mechanism to capture a portion of block rewards for sustainably funding ongoing network development. That EIP sets values and addresses to zero and so does not actually collect any rewards. This proposal is to set those values to non-zero for 18 months in order to fund Ethereum 1.X working groups and organization efforts. The block reward will go towards paying back a loan with a small amount of interest to organizations in the Ethereum community. After 18 months the block reward would again reduce to zero. | ||
[EIP-1890](http://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1890) proposes a mechanism to capture a portion of block rewards for sustainably funding ongoing network development. That EIP sets values and addresses to zero and so does not actually collect any rewards. This proposal is to explicitly set those values and begin collecting a portion of block rewards for 18 months in order to fund Ethereum 1.X working groups and organization efforts. This funding will be used to repay an initial loan provided by investors in the community funding this work with a small amount of interest. After 18 months the block reward would again reduce to zero. | ||
|
||
<!--"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." Provide a simplified and layman-accessible explanation of the EIP.--> | ||
|
||
## Abstract | ||
<!--A short (~200 word) description of the technical issue being addressed.--> | ||
This EIP extends the mechanism established in EIP-1890 to add `0.044 ETH` to the block reward for a specific distribution period of `3,100,000 BLOCKS`(≈ 18 months). The `RECIPIENT_ADDRESS` is set to a smart contract with hardcoded denominations that distributes incoming ETH to a set of addresses for the purpose of Eth1.X development. The emission schedule would start at the hard fork block number and continue for `3,100,000 BLOCKS` (≈ 18 months) at which point the address and amount would again return to 0. Any further distribution would require a future hard fork. | ||
|
||
This EIP extends the mechanism established in [EIP-1890](http://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-1890) to add `0.044 ETH` to the block reward for a specific distribution period of `3,100,000 BLOCKS` (≈ 18 months). The `RECIPIENT_ADDRESS` is set to a smart contract with hardcoded denominations that distributes incoming ETH to a set of addresses for the purpose of Eth1.X development. The emission schedule would start at the hard fork block number and continue for `3,100,000 BLOCKS` at which point the amount collected would be reduced to zero. Any further distribution would require a future hard fork. | ||
|
||
## Motivation | ||
<!--The motivation is critical for EIPs that want to change the Ethereum protocol. It should clearly explain why the existing protocol specification is inadequate to address the problem that the EIP solves. EIP submissions without sufficient motivation may be rejected outright.--> | ||
|
||
The context for this proposal came from attending the [Core Dev Eth1.X Meeting](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Au1Qll-86v0) in Berlin. Development is needed to move Eth1.X forward, and I observed that a lack of funding is the primary barrier to this work. This work can only be effectively conducted within the context of working groups forming around these issues, and these working groups need funding in order to pay dedicated contractors and project managers. This proposal is a plan for funding these groups and supporting their operation. | ||
The context for this proposal came from attending the [Core Dev Eth1.X Meeting](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Au1Qll-86v0) in Berlin. Development is needed to move Eth1.X forward, and I observed that a lack of funding is the primary barrier to this work. This work can only be effectively conducted by working groups forming around these issues, and these working groups need funding in order to pay dedicated contractors and project managers. This proposal is a plan for funding these groups and supporting their operation. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't agree with this statement, and I don't think Alexey does either. Let's discuss and include him in the conversation. (The problem is at least as much a lack of people with the necessary skills and interests, coordinators, professional management, etc.) |
||
|
||
## Specification | ||
<!--The technical specification should describe the syntax and semantics of any new feature. The specification should be detailed enough to allow competing, interoperable implementations for any of the current Ethereum platforms (go-ethereum, parity, cpp-ethereum, ethereumj, ethereumjs, and [others](https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Clients)).--> | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How do we define "Ethereum1.X development"? Should we say more about this or try to narrow the scope? Or just explicitly leave it up to the discretion of the governors/keyholders?