I’d like to share some thoughts regarding open source collaboration. The Tezos Foundation plays a singular role in such discussion. There are plenty of historical open source foundations which support open source software development and innovates concerning it’s community guidelines. Tezos governance seems to interact with different interests, from stakeholders, to developers and academia. One would expected those to come together (even though ‘bridges’ seems to be just an artificial discourse). I don’t see any discussions being held publicly. Actions must be responsible and correspondent to such roles. We have possibly unpatented experiments KT1M2Gng6zuDEy7PFivXPDYgrNnYEfLsc1z1#14 (mainnet) going on within the community and ideas being ‘Standardized’ (as tzip21) while bleeding edge implementations occur undocumented and unprotected. That’s bad knowledge administration, even more, wher you take into account the generality of use cases for smart contracts implementations and libraries.
There’s nothing more objective than code:
Such works might be slightly related to the project I’ve compromised myself to build at the first place. But it’s extensions are completely unprotected.
I’d like to ask though, what’s the sense of asking a developer for collaboration, watch him publish open source, and don’t actively protect such behaviour? Is this some prehistorical governance concept that I can’t grasp? One of these days I’ve read Apache Foundation guidelines stating that ‘meritocracy’ would come from implementations (even though I’m not a huge fun of the concept). We’d like to go further documenting our steps and taking some unprecedented approaches, but I guess I’ll have to keep publishing those in a timid way for the sake of censorship resistance? This is a matter of fact a problem that can be seen in the whole web3.
Concerning ‘collaborations’ with other teams. We feel responsible to educate new developers from our perspective, and definitely I woudn’t risk enhancing such prevarication for my collabs, I think it’s important to think Blockchain industries generating jobs, as any industries should, supporting scholarships, research, or by whichever means and mostly: being geographically decentralized.