There were heated discussions about the pros and cons of Devslopes /Cache. In the foreground are mainly the points:
Catapult open source, advantage or mistake?
Catapult fork by devslopes.
Eventual release of DevslopesCatapult before Nem Public.
General value of Devslopes for NEM if they are not part of the structure.
Devslopes own blockchain.
I would be happy if we talk about it here. @Mark_Price @Jaguar0625 @gimre @BloodyRookie
As I’ve written in other thread, catapult is missing features to be released as a public chain:
Missing features are:
- state cache for public chain (part of bison milestone)
- changes in mosaic handling and fees
- PoI (TBD)
- state tree (also part of bison)
- delegated harvesting and generally account properties - cow milestone
less important, but also needed:
Creating any public chain without those features is probably a bad idea.
Catapult is open sourced with a dual license:
Catapult open source, advantage or mistake
People have complained for a long time about NEM being closed source. Now that it is open source, people are complaining about that too. /shrug
Catapult fork by devslopes / Devslopes own blockchain
Anyone who abides by the license(s) can fork open source code. This is not at all unexpected.
In general, there are not (m)any successful forks that aren’t driven by splits of visions and beliefs.
Eventual release of DevslopesCatapult before Nem Public.
Devslopes seems to have a medium-size list of features that they require before they can launch their own public chain. Unless they’re adding them themselves, they’ll still be bound by the catapult development timeframe, so will unlikely beat it to market.
General value of Devslopes for NEM if they are not part of the structure.
It seems like at least some of what they’re building will be compatible with both the catapult chain and their fork. I have no inside information, so I cannot say this for sure.
I have not seen any list of changes they plan on making to catapult. The only thing I could find was some reference that they wanted to change PoI.
It is a free market, if you don’t think they are offering a valuable service you don’t have to “invest” in them.
I can only speak for myself but here’s why I reacted mostly allergic to cache. I have no problem with catapult being open-source right now, I have no problem with what cache is doing. My frustration is solely with nem’s progress in terms of adoption. I meassure adoption in tx on the chain so it may be that many are building on nem but right now, they’re not actually using nem because we’re not seeing an increase in tx.
What made me react negatively was that devslopes just seems to have the more aggressive strategy and I think that they’ll outpace nem in terms of adoption with ease. To me cache is nem’s tech (and here the 2 projects can probably profit from each other) with a more aggressive strategy, which this thing needs imho. At the same time I feel that they have more experience with building sdks, documentation and developer onboarding in general which is also something that nem hasn’t been great at. The libraries may be great but the documentation is not that easy to find (you find a few things, what’s the latest ? what works and what doesn’t ? are they up-to-date ?).
To make a long story short: Apart from the development, I trust the devslopes team a hell of a lot more than I trust the nem team to market this thing and drive adoption. I know that the team has done great things and has gotten a lot of projects on nem but as of right now none of those have manifested in actual usage of the nem chain.
I hope I’m not offending anybody here, I owe the nem team a ton and I give them a lot of credit for their hard work.
Blockstart is a fork mate, it does as much for Nem as BitcoinCash does for Bitcoin.
Cache at least utilizes Nem public chain and xem.
Cheers
I’m not sure if there’s a difference between Cache and Blockstart but neither have anything to do with Nem’s public chain. They’re creating a completely separate fork no matter what.
That’s actually not entirely true. While it is a fork, devslopes has expressed explicit interest in contributing to the catapult source code. Also initially, I understand they are using the cache mosaic on nem’s current public chain for their services.
Yes Cacheout , I made a mistake there, (Sorry I was referring to the dapp not the actual Cache token), is said to be using/going to use the Nem public chain (for now).
So one would have to ask if and when Blockstart rolls out (which is said to use/going to use the Cache token), will it be compatible/interchangeable with the Nem chain (as Cacheout’s “Cache Token” is)?
Now this might be the stupidest question ever since I have a minimal technical knowledge of Blockchain, but wouldn’t there be an added advantage in Network effect from doing so?
I find the developer side of things interesting, who knows what may eventuate from this.
Also I find this forum funny as the CEO posted some information on here about the project and it gets merely a handful of responses.
Then Stinghe Dorian makes this post and 5 people respond only, two of them being actual Nem Core developers.
So when people are given an real opportunity to respond the crowd falls silent.
I am kind of glad I am no longer on Telegram in that respect.
Cheers