Thanks for the detailed write-up. In general, I would be interested in seeing this proposal succeed, as it does tackle a number of fundamental issues in the ecosystem.
Some comments about individual problem and solution statements.
1
My observation of Parity’s role in this space is that it is ever increasingly shifting toward core engineering and low level support, which is played correctly, will be a win for everyone, allowing teams to focus on what they are good at while benefiting the greater good. What I am hoping Parity will provide is:
- Better source code / low-level documentation [1][2], on key components such as important traits (eg. all currency later ones) and abstractions or FRAME macros.
- Better description for PRs and changes, then bundled into a more predictable and organized releases[3].
If you are interested in knowing more about either, feel free to reach out.
I believe the two pillars above would enable then more individuals and teams in the ecosystem to build education platforms and create an exponential snowball effect. It is the components that are needed to “educate more educators”. So I hope it will assist you in achieving some of your objectives.
As you have rightfully mentioned in your description, a lot of key information in this space has so far been spread by word-of-mouth. Perhaps we can name the programming equivalent of it “word of code”.
2
I also want to raise my support for more ecosystem feedback that is aggregated and delivered to the correct team and stakeholder. I often find myself in need of this information and don’t know how to find the latest version of it.