Sender | Message | Time |
---|---|---|
3 Jul 2024 | ||
11:07:32 | ||
22:29:18 | ||
5 Jul 2024 | ||
12:06:10 | ||
[ { "name": "currency_id", "type": "crust_parachain_runtime:CurrencyId", "type_name": "CurrencyId", "value": { "SelfReserve": "NULL" } }, { "name": "amount", "type": "U128", "type_name": "Balance", "value": "4989000000000000" }, { "name": "dest", "type": "staging_xcm:VersionedMultiLocation", "type_name": "Box<VersionedMultiLocation>", "value": { "V2": { "interior": { "X2": { "col0": { "Parachain": 2034 }, "col1": { "AccountId32": { "id": "0xd2a08bbfd2db378d4fdeb38ff0ee54235bf17b89488678ab1aef295c1a0ab376", "network": { "Any": "NULL" } } } } }, "parents": 1 } } }, { "name": "dest_weight_limit", "type": "staging_xcm:v3:WeightLimit", "type_name": "WeightLimit", "value": { "Unlimited": "NULL" } } ] | 12:06:24 | |
13:08:06 | ||
8 Jul 2024 | ||
06:50:02 | ||
08:47:33 | ||
9 Jul 2024 | ||
04:45:49 | ||
11 Jul 2024 | ||
10:15:06 | ||
14 Jul 2024 | ||
07:13:08 | ||
15 Jul 2024 | ||
11:19:53 | ||
16 Jul 2024 | ||
13:30:52 | ||
17:52:10 | ||
18 Jul 2024 | ||
05:18:31 | ||
05:53:44 | ||
19 Jul 2024 | ||
00:27:23 | ||
06:06:32 | ||
21 Jul 2024 | ||
08:44:26 | ||
Hey Subscan I'm just writing to express my opinion and enquiring about the rationale behind the current funding strategy for Subscan infrastructure. As you already know, Subscan is a critical infrastructural piece for the Polkadot/Substrate ecosystem. Given its essentiality, it is surprising to me that Subscan is not funded through OpenGov treasury or at least subsidised to help cut development costs for both parachains/cores and applications running on top. Funding such a systematic infrastructure could potentially: 1. Reduce Development Costs: By subsidizing Subscan, the treasury could help lower the barrier to entry for new projects and networks, enabling them to focus resources on innovation rather than infrastructure costs. 2. Enhance Ecosystem Growth: Reliable and accessible explorer services and API are vital for the growth and adoption of the ecosystem. 3. Support Sustainability: Providing consistent funding or subsidies can help ensure the long-term sustainability and continuous improvement of Subscan. I would definitely be an advocate in supporting an OpenGov proposal requesting for funding or at least subsidies some of the overhead costs. Would love to discuss this further | 23:56:10 | |
22 Jul 2024 | ||
Support 100% for an OpenGov proposal. Definitely you guys should go for it Subscan should be funded as public or common good - it’s beneficial to parachains and ecosystem | 00:09:46 | |
In reply to @spicyhotwings:matrix.org Thank you for your attention to and support for Subscan, as well as for your sincere suggestions for its development. I'm happy to share our recent plans with you. We are planning to release the reimbursement for the latest cycle's operation and maintenance fees this week. Regarding proposals related to Coretime/Bridgehub, we will prioritize them and include them in our schedule as soon as possible. We truly appreciate your advocacy for subsidies for Subscan. Your insights into reducing development costs, enhancing ecosystem growth, and supporting sustainability are Invaluable. It would be a pleasure to discuss more with you. | 02:52:23 | |
04:25:29 | ||
24 Jul 2024 | ||
Download image.png | 18:25:23 | |
Is it possible to change calling Polkadot as Polkadot Parachain to may be relay chain or mainnet? | 18:26:10 | |
* Is it possible to update referring Polkadot as Polkadot Parachain to relay chain or mainnet? | 18:26:45 | |
* Polkadot is currently referred to as Polkadot Parachain. Could you change it to relay chain or maybe mainnet? | 18:27:42 | |
25 Jul 2024 | ||
thank you for your report! will update soon! | 05:18:50 | |
14:55:02 | ||
26 Jul 2024 | ||
06:45:42 | ||
It is updated now. | 09:26:28 |