Hello @David_Heisenberg,
This proposal relates in the sense that it’s based on top of our previous work and attempts to reach the public release stage. However the process for public release is complex and this proposal doesn’t tackle most the key requirements defined by Ledger to get the application publicly released. Please also note the fact that this proposal is stating “working with the Zondax team” while we were not consulted for this.
Is there an overlap ? Partially, there is an overlap on the nano application orchard upgrade. However not only are the wallets different but we also plan to go way further by maintaining the application and the ledger live integration. We also account for an external security audit which is a key requirement to reach public release and the above proposal simply doesn’t take it into consideration. To be transparent this simply is a misunderstanding of the Ledger development and release process. Note the fact that we are the team that develops most of the Ledger applications and we are in continuous collaboration with the Ledger team. The benefits of Hahn’s proposal would be to add orchard support to our app (yet it still wouldn’t be able to reach public release) + Ywallet integration. Our proposal would also add the orchard support (hence the overlap) but it would actually be able to reach public release and would be maintained + Ledger live integration and maintenance of the Ledger App. Note also that Ledger updates the firmware frequently, specially now with the recent changes due to the upcoming stax device, which we also plan to support.
We didn’t discuss the above proposal as we consider that it’s better to build our proposal on what we can do to improve the situation rather than opposing the two proposals. But indeed we should have mentioned it so the community members that didn’t follow have a clear view of the context. Thanks for pointing that out !