Why Continue Funding Westend if Testing Has Moved to Paseo?

Governance
1

i’m trying to understand why this proposal is expected to pass given the current transition context.

If testing and ecosystem migration are now primarily happening on Paseo, why are we continuing to fund infrastructure on Westend without a clear deprecation timeline?

As noted, Westend is already being gradually replaced by Paseo, but there is still no confirmed sunset plan, which creates uncertainty for teams and resource allocation.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to either:

  • define a clear shutdown timeline for Westend, or

  • justify explicitly why continued funding is still necessary despite the shift to Paseo?

Otherwise, this risks duplicating effort and spending across two environments.

2

My understanding is that Westend is effectively a Parity (controlled) testnet. If that understanding is correct, the cost for operating it should be covered by Parity

3

We currently have:

Westend - Private Parity Testnet

Paseo - Public Testnet

Kusama - Live Testnet

All three are funded by the Polkadot treasury or the DOT economy.