Hi All, GovCo here
Thanks for your feedback on the proposal so far. This proposal was discussed at the last Govco meeting and a few comments from our side
We are overall supportive of the proposal. There is one question on our side though, we were under the impression that bridging of ETH across to Ethereum was included in the last proposal. Can you give us an update there on that and include it in your roadmap?
Other than the above point, we believe that Mimic has delivered on its promises effectively in the first 3 epochs allowing Protocol Fees to be automatically swapped into native chain tokens and facilitating the PSP 2.0 distribution process. As indicated in the original proposal. Mimic has said they won’t charge any fee during the test period. However, we understand that the new changes requested by ParaSwap in this proposal (which were not part of the initial scope) are necessary to make the swap and distribution process cleaner and more efficient while keeping up with current needs and upcoming confirmed changes.
As long as we can get comfortable with the bridging work (question above), we believe it’s fair to consider the test period over now and for Mimic to start getting paid
There were a few other questions/comments from the threads above that we’ll also try to help address;
Wasn’t swap to wETH included in the original proposal?
To clarify, the original proposal included the swap of fees to the native token on each chain, which is what Mimis is currently doing.
Multiple Fee Claimers: the point above is an assumption of future change.
Working with the ParaSwap core team, this is aligned to our vision in the short term
The processing of fees and their transfer seems to be working as we have not had any feedback to the contrary.
This is something the ParaSwap Core team is aware of (Mimic too). It can be improved to be smoother and easily done. The above changes will help in doing so.
Partner fee claimer: Does it not make sense to update partner’s smart contract and align all claiming address? Or simplify the contract to use a global address in the contract handled by a getter/setter?
Unfortunately, this is sometimes set by Partner conditions that can’t be changed from ParaSwap side. This would be for those cases