The short answer is that although there is an audit trail on the backend it wouldn’t help at all with the type of review being discussed. While Submittable has met many of our needs over the past years it’s far from perfect, especially when it comes to this type of grant comparison. I wish I could provide a more helpful response!
We timed the Submittable contract renewal so that ZCG could decide what direction to take in November. FWIW, I personally 100% support a move to GitHub (or another solution if one is found). It’s time to try something new and the timing is perfect with the upcoming ZCG move to FPF.
For completeness, here’s the Asset Swap milestones from the original proposal:
From this original grant, we’ve done part 1 (ZIPs), we’re now proposing part 2 (implementation)
As noted above, part 2 was replaced with Development in Support of Zebra, specifically Deliverables 7.1, 8.1, 11.1. You can see the replaced milestones here.
We will apply for a separate grant for part 3 when it’s ready. Part 3 depends on progress from ECC/ZF (integration of asset swap), it’s not included in this new grant, because it’s in the future and requires more effort and funding than what ZCG wished to allocate for the current grant, already including the Transaction Acceptance work.
Hope that clarifies the grant, thanks for helping us put this on the record.
Btw a move to Github would make our lives easier, Submittable is cool but we do prefer our local editors and history + state management for exactly the current usage.
@vivek at the most recent meeting, the @ZcashGrants Committee voted to approve this proposal and has requested that you provide monthly updates via the forum in this thread.