I agree with @patmast3r.
I think that it is necessary to vote for each proposal.
The Atraura members are wonderful engineers.
But If other wonderful ideas were born,
Members of Atraura are bound by this work More than 20 months.
It is also a loss.
I want them to do the work that seems to be necessary at that time.
I would like to vote in devided.
I decide priority, I want to vote each.
Is that possible?
Regarding milestones:
I agree with patmast3r that the community together with the foundation should first vote on the components. There are always must haves and nice to haves. There should be a focus on must haves before we can talk about nice to haves.
Regarding the proposal:
Blockchain technology is moving at a rapid pace and what might seem a good idea for a future milestone now can become outdated in a matter of months if not weeks.
This is why I will not support the current proposal. However, I will definitely support the funding of a NEM library (including a tech doc) should you decide to propose it. This is what is needed the most and you will probably encounter the least resistance in getting funding for this.
Regarding the funding sum:
Currently you are asking for 3 million USD with a projected completion time of 14 to 22 months (as stated by @bcn ).
If you are expanding your team to include another 3 developers (making it a team of 10 people) and want to have job stability for 24 months instead of the stated 22 months your total salaries would be 1.4 million USD (at an average of 70k USD per person per year).
Include a few hundred thousand for overhead and marketing and you are looking at 2 million USD (realistic revenue for a 10 man company for 2 years) and that is only true if the XEM price stayed the same but we are all in this because we expect the price to rise over time. Hence, the funding sum you are asking for is high (too high in my opinion).
Conclusion:
In my opinion it would make a lot more sense to fund you with the equivalent of USD 500k for a proper NEM library with documentation and go from there once it is finished. I really hope you propose this.
I support the proposal. Yes 15M XEM is a lot but there is risk involved, the team would be sticking their necks out. If they are successful in lowering the development threshold (critical to the mission IMO) then good for them, they deserve it. I am not bothered by the XEM volume.
I do agree it may be beneficial to have the milestones more dynamic. Projects with long horizons need to be dynamic and able to adapt. That said, we also need a means to measure if the team delivered. I’m curious what the community thinks about this: IMO it should be possible to -maybe using a voting mechanism- change the milestones halfway through if this is deemed desirable.
I have confidence in the technical aspects. Area’s that could end up getting too little attention are documentation and marketing (yes this framework also will need to be marketed IMO). Both of these are key to adoption.
NEM really needs this work done. I have 15 years as a software producer and I have seen a lot of project bids. If we were going to hire a specialized crypto software development firm to do this the price could easily be MUCH higher. We are in the blue chip category now. We can’t afford to sit back and hope that volunteers want to do this stuff.
IMO the risk of letting NEM fade away from moving too slowly is much greater than the risk of paying for projects that may or may not deliver to expectations. Adoption and business partnerships are going to be the lifeblood of NEM moving forward and it’s time to open up the throttle.
Developers who have blockchain experience are in red-hot demand right now. Some of the guys on this team could probably make a quarter million USD a year working for a bank.
http://www.altcointoday.com/experienced-blockchain-developers-demand-big-salaries/
The following is just the opinion of a non-expert.
I admit that it is not possible for me to accurately estimate the value of the deliverables they will be working on, so I can’t say if what they are asking for is too much or the right thing. From the little I know about the project, I would say that since they will be building tools that will attract more developers to develop tools based on the NEM blockchain, that will benefit NEM greatly in the long term (assuming everything that is described in the proposal is delivered and works as expected). In fact, I would say NEM needs something like this to be able to compete better with the likes of ethereum.
As long as:
I would say the project sounds like a good idea to me.
After having read the proposal and all messages in the forum, I want to share my personal opinion.
I really appreciate the effort put in this proposal. I find it really positive and a great initiative.
However I have some questions and remarks that I hope you find answer worthy 
Overall, I am thrilled by this proposal. It shows a vibrant community and I agree with @xpedite that we should support such initiatives.
I’m afraid rejecting such an initiative might be damaging for NEM on the long term. And the risk for NEM is limited as payments are done after milestone completion.
I think it still can be improved though by emphasizing some elements, and dropping others. A split proposal might make it unnecessarily complex, but a dicussion focused on this point might help.
Also the secretive approach of the Catapult development makes it hard to assess long term viability of the library to be built and the expected effort required to port it to catapult.
Exactly what I wanted to say. 70k yearly rate (cost) of crypto developer is compete joke.
People like this cost more like 200k a year (not what they earn, but what their company would charge us/client )
when is the voting on this proposal?
Following this and while I personally think of it as a good idea, even better one is really splitting down the proposal. I am aware that the team proposed budgeting by milestone but i don’t think it’s a good idea to accept the whole 2 year plan in advance.
As mentioned, Catapult is unknown factor in this project, and we still don’t know if anyone really knows where and if they overlap.
The question is why would they need a developer to build their own private chain, if they can use an out of the box solution like NEM?
You are missing the point. I am challenging the numbers because there is a lack of transparency in that regard. I stated on telegram that I would like to see a cost rundown. Maybe the numbers actually make sense?
Secondly, do not get stuck on the numbers. The main question that has been raised multiple times is: Does it not make more sense to focus on the must haves now before we decide what the nice to haves could be?
I simply do not like the idea that we must buy a pimped out car now (7 milestones with uncertain features) just because we need the base model (2 milestones with must have features) to get us to our destination.
Well isn’t actually as easy as that… Simply take all 7 milestones and start with the 2 most important once. The payout will be in phases anyway and by the time these two are down we’ll for sure see some kind of catapult update / Beta release / etc. By then the milestones could be reviewed and amended… Or something like that.
Still waiting for core developers to chime in. I agree it can be made into a smaller project and then other phases can be voted on. However it will slow down the process. Can you propose a smaller but useful project on its own that can be completed within a couple of months? Then the NEM catapult will be released and then we can assess any remaining proposals after that.
Good afternoon rb2,
We have been a little bit busy this last couple of days discussing how to move forward so please take these answers with a grain of salt.
Please let me reply inline:
We are thinking about it, we would like to be as agile as possible although at the same time we would like to have the resources and path to move forward with a clear aim.
The DSL is a layer on top of the Library that would organize the different functions depending on how they will be used by their domain.
The main reason for the view components is to offer an standarized (easy to use) set of views that will help any developer get bootstrapped fast if they don’t require customized templates. Think of oauth login popups for example. In the future we would like to try to add an extra layer of security trying to separate the password and therefore the keys from the rest of the system.
Core devs are working hard and they have their reasons to do it this way. For instance, constant community support requires a lot of time. However, I don’t think it can be completely overlapping since even with a complete rewrite the client and the server will always be separate entities.
TestRPC would be based on the Proxy, it is intended to mock the Blockchain.
Some of the languages mentioned are merely examples of the platforms that could easily use the framework.
It is our opinion that Mijin is one of the most important components that NEM offers. Very few chains allow easy private-public interaction. Why would you not want to improve interaction between both?
It is our understanding that the Community Fund is not intended to be as open as you are requiring (as the guidelines say). We have been completely transparent and intend to keep doing it, but you have to understand that it is not the same to be doing bounties than to aim to build and bring to market a project this size.
However we would like to announce that this proposal is on hold for the time being since the best path forward is being discussed with the core developers.
We appretiate your attention and implication on the process and are happy to see that NEM has such a strong community.
Thanks for your patience,
Albert
On hold … is this indefinitely?
I was finally coming around on your proposal and was ready to vote yes
Really hope your team can collaborate with the core devs and come up with an optimal game plan.
Looking forward to the next update …
I very much like this. I will probably vote yes when the devs and you agree on the project.
I hope the issues are worked out and this goes forward soon. I’m very much looking forward to it and I feel the NEM blockchain would benefit greatly with a standardized framework for creating applications.
Any word on this? Abandoned? Hope not!
Hello everyone out there.
wanted to say a lot of thanks as reading through this thread I found a lot of very useful information for me. my wife got me out of house because i don’t take cialis anymore and i have to learn this in order to make money 
would you people mind if i am going to ask some questions that may or may not be already asked here? thanks!!