the project is dead!! and the teams sell all coin and enjoy their hoilday!!!
Hello, no, the project is far from dead, and we are not in "holiday", but working remotely as part of the country mandatory lockdown. I will reply here with a message from Guilhem, the founder of the project, that he posted a few days ago on Discord and might address your concerns.
Hello everyone,
I am going to try to address some of the concerns that have been written here.
First of all, we understand your concerns and, for some, if not most of them, they are legit. We are working as hard as we can, with the means that we have, and DPOPS has been delayed several times already. So, it is entirely normal and expected to wonder if something wrong is going on or ask for the reasons of such a delay.
These delays can be broken down in three significant reasons:
increase in complexity/features: the current design of DPOPS is thousands of miles away from the original "Proof-of-Stake" we announced at the launch of the project. We included Byzantine Fault Tolerant algorithm, Verifiable Random Functions, Decentralized DB features, not mentioning the P2P part, and all the rest ...
To summarize, this is not a fork of any project, and Zach has written everything from scratch. And because we review our work regularly, we decided to add features, rework some part as the development was going on. The fact that we didn't do an ICO has given us a lot more room for such improvements (and delays) as we are not rushing to launch an unfinished product.
underappreciation of testing phase: to be honest, not all delays can be explained by additional features. There is one part where we can, in full transparency, say that we have not been as good as we should have, and that's the estimate of the testing phase. What we thought would take weeks has turned into months. Without going in unnecessary details, the complexity of DPOPS is leading to many edge cases that the testing phase has shown several areas of required improvements. If we were in any other industries, we would probably have rushed this or put some of the details on the side. But this is a cryptocurrency, and we cannot afford any significant failure of the code once this goes live. I know most of us in the community understand and support that.
lack of resources: when we initially designed the project, we chose not to perform an ICO for all the right reasons that you know. We still had a plan for a private sale that would have allowed us to raise additional funding and increase the team size. Because of the bad cryptocurrency environment, we chose to only sell a small part of the coins (~2 bn) at a price that was lower than we would have expected. It is a strategical decision, and it can be challenged, but I am happy we found the resources internally to keep supporting the project and not be greedy to sell coins. The good news is that we are still working on the project, and we will keep supporting the project throughout 2020 and beyond.
To increase the reach of the project, accelerate & extend the development, and retribute some of the people who are helping us from the start, we have worked for the past 3 months on a Builder's Program. Those who have been working on open source projects know how much it can be complicated from governance, contribution guideline, and retribution perspective. Paul has been putting a great effort, and I am confident this will set us apart from the rest of the market.
This will go live next week with a full open-sourcing of X-Cash developments, starting with the android wallet.
The road is long, but when you put great minds like Zach, a supporting community, and the resilience & patience to build something truly innovative, it can only work. Thanks for all the support.
I hope this addresses your concerns, in the meantime, I invite you to check our progress on our GitHub,
https://github.com/X-CASH-official, and please join us in the development through the builders' program that will be released soon on the organization repo.
