Is the Github Action failure Google Sheet Update normal? Is it my fault? 😢

Hi Chris, thanks for the delivery. We will look into it as soon as possible.
The check is just for internal bookkeeping, nothing to worry about.

Hi Chris, thanks for the delivery. We will look into it as soon as possible.
The check is just for internal bookkeeping, nothing to worry about.

Okay, thanks Sebastian. If you need a quick answer, the best way is to ask in our Discord https://discord.gg/7W9UDvsbwh as we have team member covering China timezone. Otherwise, I will respond here during PDT working hours.

@semuelle, did you get a chance to take a look at the delivery. Do you have any questions? The announcement articled is proofread by Majella Horan, but we can't publish it yet without your verification.

Below is the web UI being developed for the M2 delivery. I'm pasting it here to give you some visual idea of the app.

Landing page

Project Detail page

Hi Chris, we have a bit of a backlog with regard to evaluations, so it might take another two or three days until someone gets to it.

@chrisli30 Sorry for the late reply here. The UI looks really nice. I started to look into your delivery (see my initial notes here). In general it looks good, but I have few smaller comments:

• It seems that currently everything is stored on-chain without a limit, see: https://github.com/OAK-Foundation/quadratic-funding-pallet/blob/bb2a5248bac7a8b6ef21e570f0942c0db40c8e6b/pallets/open-grant/src/lib.rs#L206. You could also consider changing the weights calculation for this, see for example: https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/blob/0bda86540d44b09da6f1ea6656f3f52d5447db81/frame/identity/src/lib.rs#L592
• tic-funding-test repo has no license
• Why didn’t you use rust unit tests?
• Appeal doesn't seem to be implemented, which was mentioned in the original contract

David, thanks for taking a look! We have been addressing your feedback, but got a question here.

• It seems that currently everything is stored on-chain without a limit
  My understanding is that in order to be aligned with the weight format in identity pallet, we need to two things.

1. Benchmarking the functions in our pallet, and
2. Run the benchmark CLI to generate the weights.rs file and weight tags above each function

Is that correct?

• tic-funding-test repo has no license

Fixed, added Apache 2.0. AvaProtocol/quadratic-funding-test@8ab2428

• Why didn’t you use rust unit tests?

We wanted to do both dev and test in parallel so we can complete the milestones in 2 months time, so I made a decision to have our Javascript QA to write tests since he needs to get familiar with the RPC interface for web app development. Do you feel necessary to write unit tests in Rust? If yes, do you think if we can create a small open grant for it?

• Appeal doesn't seem to be implemented, which was mentioned in the original contract

Yes, as we gave more thought about the functionalities during development, we changed the original plan a little. There turned out to be more functions than we planned, however the Appeal function got cut. Reason being that there are only two steps to which the public could appeal against, the grant selection before round start and the grant cancellation during a round. In both case, we decide that a project shouldn't slow down the whole round with appeals, and can always retry in the next round. Therefore, the flow is more smooth without the appeal.

The original

The actual

Thanks for the update. In general, the milestone is accepted and I will forward your invoice internally.

But It would be nice if you could move the delivery to a separate repo (rather than a fork), so that it's easier for others to follow your work and potentially to contribute to it. Regarding unit tests in Rust, I don’t think we would sign a new grant for this. It’s not mandatory to implement unit tests specifically in Rust, but in general it makes sense and you might want to consider doing this anyway for security reasons. Also it allows you to test your benchmarks. Regarding weights, you probably should take a look at the following: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa6sTyUqgek as well as the readme and the knowledgebase. But be aware of the following issue https://github.com/substrate-developer-hub/substrate-developer-hub.github.io/issues/771.

Thanks for the update. In general, the milestone is accepted and I will forward your invoice internally.

But It would be nice if you could move the delivery to a separate repo (rather than a fork), so that it's easier for others to follow your work and potentially to contribute to it. Regarding unit tests in Rust, I don’t think we would sign a new grant for this. It’s not mandatory to implement unit tests specifically in Rust, but in general it makes sense and you might want to consider doing this anyway for security reasons. Also it allows you to test your benchmarks. Regarding weights, you probably should take a look at the following: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa6sTyUqgek as well as the readme and the knowledgebase. But be aware of the following issue substrate-developer-hub/substrate-developer-hub.github.io#771.

Awesome, thanks David @Noc2 for your time! We are almost done with the benchmarking. I will at you to take a look at the PR once submitted.

The announcement article has been proofread and passed. Is there anything else required before we publish it?

Good morning,

Could you please add the company address on the invoice?
You can send to this email address the updated invoice: invoices@web3.foundation.

Many thanks,
Regards,

Federica Dubbini

The announcement article has been proofread and passed. Is there anything else required before we publish it?

Best to double check with grantspr. It might make sense to coordinate the announcement.

invoices@web3.foundation.

Federica,

I updated the invoice with address and sent it to invoices@web3.foundation. Please see if there's any other questions.

Thanks!

The announcement article has been proofread and passed. Is there anything else required before we publish it?

Best to double check with grantspr. It might make sense to coordinate the announcement.

Got it, David. Sure.

We've created another PR for the benchmarking. Could you take a look at this file and see if it's as expected?
https://github.com/OAK-Foundation/quadratic-funding-pallet/blob/92e624a8b85c920c10993177332d849942f0eab9/pallets/quadratic-funding/src/lib.rs#L245

The whole benchmarking PR is quite large, as shown here.
AvaProtocol/quadratic-funding-pallet#1

We also move the main branch code to a new repo instead of a fork.

Many thanks!