@0xdef1cafe appreciate you weighing in on this and understand where you are coming from regarding an engineering perspective and the drive towards the best resource allocation amid open source and decentralization efforts, but I respectfully disagree in this case. I want to see the integration in as many places as possible if there is funding to support the work getting done and today the vast majority of ShapeShift users are on mobile and the current web platform.
Leaving aside the point that the new open source platform (which we of course all strongly support and want to see the yearn integration in as well) is not out yet and will likely not reach feature parity with the current platform for some undetermined amount of time (probably measured in months not weeks), If we leave out where the majority of current ShapeShift users are right now we are operating against the current network effects of ShapeShift which I think would be a big mistake.
Yearn integration into the mobile app is critical IMO and one of ShapeShift’s differentiation points right now from others apps. We don’t have a plan to replace the mobile app right now contemplated yet and it’s where the majority of user owned wallets are + offers the best user experience today when using ShapeShift.
I think we are much better off finding a way to do work that can offer further functionality in both the new web app and the current web app + mobile apps simultaneously as much as possible, such as by integrating unchained work into current platform so we don’t have to duplicate work (an idea Adam was saying we could explore to get the best benefits of adding new chains in the short term), rather than just abandoning our network effects right now during this critical period of time where they matter so much to keep the community on a path of growth.
I don’t see any harm in having broken out bounties for different parts of the work in the proposal (open source app, current web app, and mobile apps) and if no engineers step up to claim the bounties for something like current web or mobile then, so be it at that point, it won’t get done, but I think the incentive should be there and it would benefit the community to do so and have more options to spread this critical functionality to more users, and importantly drive more ShapeShift DAO revenue sooner.
Ultimately any bounties placed on this would need to be engaged by interested engineers working on their own time to complete, I don’t think we should be mandating they should not work on also adding this functionality to the current apps if they are voluntarily willing to do so to pickup additional bounty incentives, I think the benefits to the community would be more than worth it to fund and have that work completed.
I am on the other side of this, if this proposal only incentivized adding this to the yet to be released, and not at feature parity, open source web app - and did not include bounties for current apps, I would be quite reticent to vote for it as I would not feel like we would be looking out for where the users currently are and thus not looking out for the ShapeShift DAO community’s best interest at this time.