Referendum #1657

Retroactive Tip for Assets-related Contributions to Polkadot SDK in the past 12 months

13d ago

Executed

Content

AI Summary


Proponent	`12gMhxHw8QjEwLQvnqsmMVY1z5gFa54vND74aMUbhhwN6mJR`
Date	6/07/2025
Amount	`7,575.654 USDT`

I'm requesting a one-time retroactive tip to cover the costs for implementing several contributions that enable broader usage beyond transfers (locking, covering deposits) for assets in Asset Hub/Polkadot Hub. These contributions are either already released or in the process of being merged for further release.

Motivation

In the last year, I made three major contributions to the Polkadot SDK, which impact the user experience of Asset Hub/Polkadot Hub.

#3951 (already released):
- Provides basic support for freezes (locks) using assets in the Asset Hub. This enables the possibility, among others, of vesting assets (#7404).
#4530 (already released):
- Provides basic support for holds (deposits) using assets in the Asset Hub. This is connected to an upcoming project to determine which asset to use for paying deposits (utilising a conversion model) when signing a transaction, or even paying for deposits using stablecoins or ETH across the bridge.
- Refactors the balances model (the way balances are calculated) for asset accounts to be in line with the way native token balances are calculated.
#7404 (in final review): Brings pallet-vesting to assets, so people can make vested transfers of (among others) stablecoins or tokens in Asset Hub. Made possible by #3951.

In total, the measured amount for these contributions (measured in time spent, with a fixed hourly rate) exceeds the already compensated amount.

Cost Breakdown

Measured amount: $9,800 (with a rate of $50/h).

Time spent in the three projects: 196h (~1.84 mo)

Already compensated amount: $2,224.346

2 months of Fellowship salary: $1,666.666.
Tip for #3951: $557.68 (80 DOT at $6.971/DOT — EMA 7).

Remaining amount: $7,575.654

Edited

Request

≈7.58KUSDT

Status

Decision7d

Confirmation

1hr

Attempts

Tally

65%Aye

50.0%Threshold

35%Nay

Aye

≈26.17MDOT

Nay

≈14.11MDOT

0.0%
0.0%
Threshold
0.0%

Support

0.30%

≈4.7MDOT

Issuance

≈1.58BDOT

Votes

Nested

Flattened

Actions

Check how referenda works here.

Call

Metadata

Timeline6

Votes Bubble

Statistics

Comments

15wb...zWSp

hello @pandres95 ,

can you explain why the fellowship just cover a part of your total request? Thanks

13fv...22E7

Hey Pablo,
I like the work you are doing. You are picking up a lot of things and deliver good work. I'm also fine with paying tips for these kind of work as it is done. However, I'm personally not a fan to come up later and requesting a tip based on some hourly rate for open source work. You have done this work as open source work and then requesting funding afterward feels weird. I would encourage you to go to the Rust OG bounty for example. There we can agree on the work and payment before and not trying to request it afterwards.

13zn...P5ju

Dear Proposer,

Thank you for your proposal. Our second vote on this proposal is AYE.

The Big Tipper track requires 35% participation and simple majority of non-abstain votes according to our voting policy v0.2, and any referendum in which the majority of members vote abstain receives an abstain vote. This proposal has received four aye and zero nay votes from ten available members. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

The voters expressed unanimous support for the referendum, viewing it as a valuable contribution to enhance existing fellowship salaries. They believed that the proposed compensation was reasonable and justified, considering the significance and scope of the work involved. Overall, the comments reflected a consensus that supporting individual contributors through this initiative was a sensible and fair approach.

The full discussion can be found in our internal voting.

Please feel free to contact us through the links below for further discussion.

Kind regards,
Permanence DAO
Decentralized Voices Cohort IV Delegate

📅 Book Office Hours
💬 Public Telegram
🌐️ Web
🐦 Twitter
🗳️ Delegate

Up 1

12mP...Eyoh

PolkaWorld votes AYE

PolkaWorld supports retroactive funding proposals — and this one is well-justified. The requested compensation of $50/hour is reasonable, and all the work has already been delivered and integrated. It’s a proposal worth supporting.

We are aligned in our assessment:
• The requested amount is fair and reflects the actual development workload and market standards.
• The relevant features have been completed and deployed, providing real utility.
• These improvements will enhance the user experience and asset usability on Asset Hub / Polkadot Hub, contributing to the growth of the ecosystem.

You can view the full feedback [here].