To apply to Abstract Account granting program

[yaroslavyaroslav]

There’s the new EIP-4337 that is about the user friendly features account e.g. wallet features.

On the other hand Ethereum foundation open grant funding to push community to provide support of this EIP as fast as possible.

The grant program has following traits:

• up to $50,000
• Application should be provided within March.

The full list of the requirements could be found at the link above.

So the proposal of this issue is to decide whether it worth to apply to this grant program to move this features at the top of our roadmap, or should we just ignore them for now, and come back later when their time would come.

I think it worth to mention, that that grant, if any, would be spent to pay the efforts of those maintainers who would actually implement all that stuff.

Regarding my experience the numbers that are ok for Ethereum foundation is about 2,500-3,000 per month of full time efforts, for one developer. And the total duration of a project that is highly likely would pass their review is up to 4 month.

So I ask you to consider this closely yet quite soon, since performing application would take pretty much time as well.

[yaroslavyaroslav]

@janndriessen @JeneaVranceanu @skywinder

[janndriessen]

I'd probably be down. Obviously, I do have other jobs, so depends on what you mean by full-time. In general, though as I did here before I'd strive to complete tasks that I'd take on to ship as fast as possible.

The topic and its implementation would certainly be pretty interesting!

[yaroslavyaroslav]

Great news!

I see it as a matter of roadmap preority question at first place. Like do we consider it as an important task to be implemented at first place among the others. If we do so, than there's a few outomes from appears from that decision.

The first one, that we, as the most popular and convenient Ethereum iOS library, are definitely worth to get funded by that program, yet we still have to make an appropriate application with our vision of what that future would be like.

The second one comes, that there's has to be a lead developer of those release, the guy in charge if you wish, the one who would made final decisions of the API design and to push to his/her vision of this features to come true. Personally I consider @JeneaVranceanu for this role. So this is not 100% fulltime job, but pretty much it actually. But as for myself he's doing pretty much this already with the amount of his contribution since 3.0.0 release has come.

The third one is that I hope that this release would be made in much more collaboration in opposit to 3.0.0, that was made pretty much by myself. I'm really hoping that that release has become well enough foundation to make this library to be maintainable simultoniuosly by a few contributor folks, without hitting large merge conflicts on every PR.

The fourth one is that I see the fair way of sharing that granting regarding to an effort that the one would would make to make that release come true. So if any would just write a few tests their could expect like 100$, if one would implement like 25% of all tasks it could expect let's say 5k$ in total regardless of how time it would take to their, of course if this time is reasonable and would suit Ethereum foundation approved deadline. The numbers yet are completely abstract, but you got the point.

Worth to mention, that as for now, I myself do not consider to participate into any design, development or testing of those features. But, as I has an experience of successfully grant application to a similar Ethereum funding program, I would love to help the one who will do so with consultations and organisations of the application process.

So to conclude all of the above:

1. We need a folk who would lead both studing these EIP, designing the solution and implementing (or managing its implementation) them at the end. Their obviously has to have both deep knowlage of our library and Ethereum itself.
2. That folk alone or with some others has to actually design and estime its development duration any solution on a paper within next 10 days, to it be then formatted and applied to a given grant within its deadline (2023.03.30).
3. Fundings amount has to be figured out based on the last one and has to be negotiated within all future significant participants and then to be agreeded by all of them. The one of whom certainly would be @skywinder.

Still looking forward for @JeneaVranceanu about his thoughts about that.

[skywinder]

Thank you for point it ! I'm in! EIP-4337 Is definitely a must-have feature for our library!

[yaroslavyaroslav]

Just for the record. Later on I'll convert this issue into a Discussion, which is better fits its essential. And if no one would stand against moving that direction, I'll create appropriate project for that EIP tasks, that in its turn has to be filled with relative tasks to being implemented within the grant.

[JeneaVranceanu]

Thank you @yaroslavyaroslav for pinging and choosing me as a candidate for the role. Appreciate it!
Agree with @skywinder that this feature is a must.

But here is a personal catch: you've probably noticed yourself that I had a rough time reviewing a few PRs for the past few weeks and that's all due to lack of time. The issue with time will constantly change giving me sometimes more opportunity to focus on web3swift.
Taking into consideration EIP-4337's complexity and the fact that this grant program will also need a deadline I'm not sure I'll be able to complete it in time.

I'll dig into EIP-4337 today and will let you know what are the chances I'll agree to be a lead developer on this particular feature.

I'd love to see this library evolve without a question.

Let me get back to you with a final decision today.

[yaroslavyaroslav]

@JeneaVranceanu Thank you for reaching out with that. And let me point out few most important yet opaque things that I think you've biased.

1. It's ok to implement that feature partially in several stages.
2. It's ok to move that deadline for a reasonable time because of ugh reasons.

My experience of participating with Ethereum foundation are pretty smooth one. I mean they are ok with splitting the whole into a chunks to implement some and at the meantime they're not rushing you with the deadline, if you're putting on the table some fair reasons why does it happened.

[yaroslavyaroslav]

Looking forward to your decision.

[seanbhart]

Hey everyone, I'm looking at implementing some ERC-4337 capabilities into an app and wondering if there's an update on this. Thanks!

[JeneaVranceanu]

Hey everyone, I'm looking at implementing some ERC-4337 capabilities into an app and wondering if there's an update on this. Thanks!

You are almost right on time as @yaroslavyaroslav has received a response from Ethereum Foundation. Unfortunately, our proposal was rejected. It was expected as out of the whole ERC-4337 web3swift touches only a tiny part but anyway, we tried.

Nonetheless, I think we should lay a path for developing ERC-4337 to have a clear vision of what has to be done to support ERC-4337. Until this moment we had only a proposal with the -level vision but no specific, technical details.

---

I was less involved with the library for the last month or so. Will try to get back on track in the upcoming days/weeks. I'd like to do 2 things: draft the ERC-4337 milestone and check all open PRs, move them to completion as close as possible.

If you have any expectations or vision in mind regarding what would you expect to have in the library when it comes to ERC-4337 (or anything else) feel free to let us know.

[JeneaVranceanu]

I'm closing this issue as it is about the grant program.
Here is a new one for planning: #820

We can continue all conversations there or in Discord.