This month we’ve invited our Integration Team to respond to community questions about the development of the eWallet Suite, Ethereum integration and their shifting focus towards Plasma implementation.
Here are five questions the community had to ask, answered by integration team lead Thibault:
1. Integration Team development speed has slowed considerably from the start of April. Is the team dedicated to other tasks?
As the integration team, we've always been working on different projects, with the eWallet getting most of our attention and time. Until around April, we spent 80% of our time working on the eWallet and made good progress. It might appear as if the development speed slowed down. However, at that time, we started adding more things to our plate like Potterhat, our Ethereum node availability application.
Additionally, the Ethereum integration process took some time as we navigated in unknown territories and had a few setbacks that required additional research and design. We also have to be extra careful when writing the code dealing with blockchains, due to the risks that come with the technology. A misstep could lead to possible compromised systems and private keys, loss of funds, bugs and more.
2. If there are fiat on/off ramps via exchanges or wallets connected directly to OmiseGO Network, is it possible that you would never have to actually exit to Ethereum?
Yes, it’s definitely possible, and it's something we're counting on! Depositing on the network is pretty straightforward, so there isn't much to solve there. However, exiting, with its tricky steps, can definitely be improved. A way it could be improved is by not exiting at all (if the ecosystem is there) or by exchanging funds on the network with funds on Ethereum.
The latter example would mean that users would not have to exit. Users would simply get their funds back on Ethereum instantly through an intermediary, who, if needed, would then handle the exits.
3. The new API's being implemented due to the old ones being cumbersome/difficult to use for current partners/testers, is it going set us back? Will this render other past work incompatible and also have to be redone?
I'm not sure which APIs are being referenced here. But for the eWallet, we've received positive feedback from implementers in the past.
The good news is that we're not redoing anything and are still focusing on adding new features! We of course, welcome all feedback to improve the eWallet.
4. With Burger King using the OmiseGO eWallet Suite, at this stage, what are the aspects/features that worked out and what are the aspects/features that need improvement to facilitate greater adoption?
The way Burger King uses the OmiseGO eWallet is pretty simple. They are mostly relying on the transaction system without using the more advanced features we offer (preferring to handle those from their side). One challenge we noted was the minting flow. We encouraged manual minting to get them used to minting ERC-20 tokens, however, that led to failed transactions due to lack of funds.
What we can improve upon is to provide more guidance and educational materials. We might have pushed too early with the blockchain-style features, and our users coming from a more traditional background could benefit from a slower and more on hands on-boarding process.
5. Please can you expand/explain/critique the latest tweet from Vitalik regarding layer two scaling solutions?
For this question, we’re going to quote the man himself with his explanation on layer two scaling solutions:
"I'd say plasma still makes a lot of sense for the DEX use case, because it is a use case that fits into the specific parameters that make the issues around L2 less of an issue. Specifically, it basically requires only payments and atomic swaps (and also, developers can make their lives easier by requiring order-executing agents to post extra collateral to cover both sides of the entire orderbook in case they misbehave); payments have existed in plasma since forever, and atomic swaps are harder but have been done in plasma cash at this point. What you're not going to easily get out of plasma (or channels) is a build-your-own-smart-contract platform with anywhere close to the versatility of Ethereum itself. So the application-specific work per application is going to be high; but that's not a problem for OMG because it is a single application and at this point the team has done most of that work already." - Vitalik Buterin