[IDEATION] Engineering Workstream Renewal, Oct '23 - Mar '24

Engineering Workstream Renewal, Oct '23 - Mar '24

Abstract / Overview

This proposal adopts [SCP-92 Definition of Workstream Leader](https://snapshot.org/#/shapeshiftdao.eth/proposal/0x3529a9ab550387d1eedf34d0ba26b5c80ed1c04a74a3c407d9b06a6ea90325ab).

This proposal is to continue to fund the Engineering Workstream’s budget from October 1st, 2023 through March 31th, 2024 inclusive (6 months).

The ShapeShift DAO relies on the Engineering Workstream to maintain the code base, undertake core engineering work to enable new features, and to provide architectural oversight and technical leadership as we continue to execute the roadmap as defined by the Product Workstream.


Previous proposal

The Engineering workstream came in under budget of the previously approved proposal.

  • June $90,667 (included humblehound)

  • July $75,667

  • August $82,567 (included $6900 QR bug reimbursement)

  • September $75,667

Total labor and contingency spend of $324,567 USDC against an approved [$417,633](https://snapshot.org/#/shapeshiftdao.eth/proposal/0xdbd3051cd544def2e73c052596a44e66c519e9f8b94b827afeef385e1bd5d892)

Completed deliverables

  • Gnosis chain support including swapping

  • Foxatars project and support of mercle team

  • FOX Missions page

  • NFT support via OpenSea and Zapper

  • Gas estimation revamp

  • Full rearchitecture of swapper including multi hop trade support

  • THORChain Streaming Swaps

  • Trade time estimates

  • Fiat ramp updates and maintenance

  • Coinbase wallet

  • Chatwoot support widget

  • Mobile app update

  • Clear cache function for support

  • Charka UI major version upgrade

  • Yat project completion

  • Manual/advanced trade slippage support

  • Major using facing performance improvements across all platforms, including render and network

  • Add trade price impact warnings

  • Add time estimate to trades

  • FOX Farming V7

  • Various Mixpanel data reporting

  • Trade route analysis to negotiate vendor pricing

  • Backend infrastructure dashboard at monitoring.shapeshift.com

  • Specification, architecture and implementation of exchange.shapeshift.com first milestone

  • WalletConnect V2 as a dapp (ongoing)



This proposal seeks to have the Engineering Workstream be the sole maintainers with discretion over CODEOWNERS, permissions and administrative rights of the ShapeShift GitHub namespace. The billing account shall be controlled by the Fox Foundation.

This is to ensure the DAO maintains a high standard of code quality, velocity, reduced regressions, and has a single core team acting as maintainers responsible for the codebase.

The Engineering Workstream will work with external contributors to ensure contributions can be made expeditiously while not compromising quality, patterns or stability.

Budget spreadsheet

The details below expand upon the [budget spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lS0dA32rYdEpKnxOGKhSqs3ba7ffHtgX-nIKdvEDJIM)

Recurring costs


  • Any contributor reserves the right to take any portion of salary in FOX and locked varieties thereof.


The Fox Foundation covers the costs for infrastructure that powers the entire backend of the open source platform and mobile app, and the Engineering Workstream is not requesting funds to cover these costs in this proposal.

Non-recurring costs


The budget contains a line item for $5,000 USDC of discretionary funds which may be used for travel, conferences, retreats etc, at engineering’s discretion.

The line item above is provisional, and any unspent funds will be returned to the DAO.

This budget seeks approval for the commitment of $5,000 USDC for non-recurring costs.


Unforeseen costs will arise, and 10% of the USDC subtotal is requested accordingly.

The budget seeks approval for $47,700 for contingency to be spent judiciously at the workstream’s discretion, shall it be required.


Unused funds from any budget category will be returned to the DAO at the end of the budget cycle.

In the event that the Engineering Workstream requires more funds, a separate governance proposal shall be raised.



The Engineering Workstream continues on from the previously approved proposal(s).

The Engineering Workstream is the “how”, rather than the “what”. The Product Workstream has the mandate of “what” is to be built, the Engineering Workstream has the mandate of the “how” it is built.

The workstream exists to execute on Product Workstream’s roadmap.


The Engineering Workstream will report progress against these goals via the following methods

  • availability via Discord, covering most time zones

  • weekly product/engineering public meetings

  • weekly governance calls

  • on demand for any specific deliverable

Should the community request other reasonable forms of reporting they will be considered on their merits.


The DAO delivers a product to increase ease of use of the multi-chain multi-wallet multi-protocol universe that we find ourselves in. It is the Engineering effort that builds our product. We need Engineering in order to thrive.


Engineering labor is the most expensive component of the DAO’s budget. Any aspect that does not seem appropriate to serve the greater needs of the DAO should be criticized.


FOR: Fund the Engineering Workstream from October 1st 2023 - March 31st 2024 for $524,700 USDC, with 0xdef1cafe as the Workstream Leader.

AGAINST: Do not fund the Engineering Workstream beyond October 1st 2023.

In the budget sheet I notice that it doesn’t have any comparisons to previous budget cycles or even breakdowns in compensation of stables and Fox, is this not a thing anymore? Maybe this isn’t a budget detail but a very simple budget statement? This seems to be acceptable for the majority of the DAO’s community as it seems a reoccurring case that only providing very simple data for the largest spending determination is plausible and continues on multiple budget requests. I know that i frequently in the past have asked for more complete verifiable, and viable data to make these types of determinations, but if the DAO doesn’t need it I guess that it is acceptable. Maybe discussed elsewhere?

In cases like this I would believe much more realizable data would be incorporated but that just might be me? Great to see all the past budget cycle features that were worked on listed out as a summary, but I would like to ask how does that directly translate into realizable value, ROI or expansion of capital runway? Is it wrong to expect certain WorkStreams directly relative and related to DAO income generation? I believe in the past grants and or capital secured thru direct action was listed, this would be helpful to be compiled and compared within productivity and cost assessments.

We have usage stats, capital invested, and other usage data still? If so are these metrics being incorporated into viable and tangible ROI outcomes? How time is spent vs the ratio or value incorporated into the DAO is this even done for any WorkStream currently? I mean I see availability via discord for most time zones and attending weekly meetings, but as performance based justifications these listed items are lacking in my opinion, almost mocking in the fact that no additional datasets have been formulated years into this WorkStream.

I am sure that number of builds, Github pushes, and releases can all be listed as resources but many could say that quantity or even speed of iteration isn’t a measurement of quality or doesn’t always translate into realized value shared within any organization. Understandably everyone would like to only put their best foot forward but as it relates to budgetary requests, including the good with the possibly perceived “bad” only makes for fair and should make for better determination. As a few examples I could see metrics like:

Time spent reworking new or existing solutions, maybe a period average, weekly?

Correcting bugs introduced into the codebase, same maybe an average broken out by individual

App and or function down time as a overall percentage or some sort of agreed QOS

Recent relative and related compensation comparisons, maybe a average percentile including regional breakdown, don’t think that it would be fair to match just high demand job markets and not average out a few that make sense.

Number of targeted projections met/missed

This is just a few top of mind and I know the first two could be determined very similar in that case choosing the one that makes the most sense. This maybe a departure from what has happened up to this point, but with the existing financial crisis that this community and DAO is in, looking for answers and data to make sound determinations is something everyone should be doing effectively, without that continuing to stumble in the dark is a common outcome. I may be unique in having higher expectations for any budget request, and most certainly one for half a million dollars for a six month period, and even more so when the longevity of the project is such a concern.

Just from the outside looking in the optics could seem like maybe it is assumed a forgone conclusion, that the need for this team of coders outweighs any associated cost and that transparency isn’t called for.

@0xdef1cafe I know that this recently passed and was in process when posted, but questions were posted with days still left for the community to vote. Was it lost in the shuffle? Or possibly just overlooked?

If that is not the case by some odd chance, I would then ask are difficult community questions not relative in this case on the forum for this WorkStream or even future budget requests? Is it not beholden to the current and future WorkStream leaders to ensure WorkStream transparency, and offer how the DAO benefits from budgets allotted to themselves and determined teams?

Maybe this has changed, and now teams work more like traditional organizations in that they report to management or some other hierarchy, or maybe discord is the preferred medium. If the latter is the case I would say that discord wouldn’t be ideal for that type of documentation and or reference but that is an opinion that may have been overridden by a majority within the community.

Individuals can utilize a GST calculator to budget their expenses and plan their finances. By calculating the GST component, they can determine the total amount they need to allocate for goods and services, helping them make informed financial decisions. https://gstinfo.net/