Add Larch phase 2

[radhe-zeeve]

Zeeve Larch Phase 2

This is a follow-up to a previous grant of Zeeve_zoombienet_deployment_testing_automation by gnv-zeeve · Pull Request #1399 · w3f/Grants-Program, this grant focus on addition of more configurations (node groups, collator groups, settings), form based testing configuration (zndsl) input and import/export of templates to and from zombienet config.

Grant level

• Level 1: Up to $10,000, 2 approvals
• Level 2: Up to $30,000, 3 approvals
• Level 3: Unlimited, 5 approvals (for >$100k: Web3 Foundation Council approval)

Application Checklist

• The application template has been copied and aptly renamed (project_name.md).
• I have read the application guidelines.
• Payment details have been provided (bank details via email or Polkadot (USDC & USDT) address in the application).
• The software delivered for this grant will be released under an open-source license specified in the application.
• The initial PR contains only one commit (squash and force-push if needed).
• The grant will only be announced once the first milestone has been accepted (see the announcement guidelines).
• I prefer the discussion of this application to take place in a private Element/Matrix channel. My username is: @ghanzeeve:matrix.org

[github-actions]

The applicant has requested the discussion of the application to happen in a private chat room.

[semuelle]

Hey @radhe-zeeve. Are you still working on this application? If not, can you either close it or move it out of draft?

[radhe-zeeve]

@semuelle, the application is ready for review, and discussion can be done on this PR.

[keeganquigley]

Thanks for the application @radhe-zeeve I have a couple comments/questions:

• Our payment options have recently changed; would you be willing to accept USDC on Asset Hub instead of ETH mainnet?
• You provided some great mockups for the UI, but I'm not seeing any of these components listed in the milestone deliverables. If the main focus of this grant is the GUI, could you please provide more info in the milestone tables and include detailed info about about how you will build it out?
• In my opinion, 5 milestones might be overkill since each one only contains only one main deliverable. Is there any way we could combine these into 2 or 3 milestones? For example, I wonder if M4 "collator config support" could be combined with M5 zndsl setup. (This won't affect the status of the application regarding the decision, but might help save us a bit of time on evaluations :) ).
• How do you plan to fund/maintain this project after this grant ends? Would you look for treasury funding or the decentralized futures program for example?

[radhe-zeeve]

Payment info still needs to be updated to Polkadot USDC (Asset Hub). Others recommendations have been considered and applied accordingly.

[radhe-zeeve]

@keeganquigley payment info updated as well

[semuelle]

Hi @radhe-zeeve. I'm sorry for the long radio silence. @keeganquigley will be back tomorrow to continue his review. In the meantime, do you have any metrics on the use of Larch so far? You mention a "developer and client community of 27K+". What is this number based on? Did you use any data/input from the community to inform this proposal?

[keeganquigley]

Thanks for the changes @radhe-zeeve it is looking better. In addition to the above, I have the following comments:

• We usually don't fund production or deployment efforts, such as the Kubernetes section. I'm wondering if it's possible for you to fund this part yourselves.
• Most of these milestones seem beneficial only for the Zombienet product, which makes me wonder if the treasury would be a better fit for funding.

[radhe-zeeve]

@semuelle: Currently, Larch has a limited user base since it recently achieved stability a couple of months ago. We've conducted internal presentations and are planning to promote it at Subzero (Bangkok), through webinars, and other potential Polkadot events. The claim of a "developer and client community of 27K+" is based on our Zeeve's user base at the time of writing.

@keeganquigley: In our proposal, we haven't explicitly considered Kubernetes infrastructure costs. We can manage the cost related to deployments efforts during development.

We would like to proceed with the current grant level. Additionally, we've applied for another grant for our project Wrench. Our plan is to integrate Larch into Wrench during the second phase, for which we may submit a separate application for a treasury grant for maintenance of both projects.

[takahser]

@radhe-zeeve I've added a couple of inline comments, feel free to have a look.

[semuelle]

Hey @radhe-zeeve, thanks again for the application, but the committee has decided not to support it at this point. I am therefore closing this pull request.
We appreciate the work you have done on the project and hope that you will find a way to continue working on it.