GG24: Case for dev tooling

🧐 Gitcoin Sensemaking Szn
1

TL;DR

  • Domain: Dev Tooling should have a GG24 domain allocation to ensure Ethereum’s tooling backbone is sustainably funded.
  • Steward: Dev Tools Guild unites the teams behind Ethereum’s most widely used developer tools to fund critical infrastructure, increase coordination between developer tooling projects and the core protocol.
  • Funding: Dev Tooling should be a scaled quadratic round with Dev Tools Guild representing their member projects and scaled based on the number of member projects

Domain: Dev Tooling

Gitcoin 3.0’s vision is Funding What Matters and dev tooling is fundamental to Ethereum’s future:

  • Ethereum apps and infrastructure depend on these tools.
  • Neglecting tooling risks developer friction, ecosystem fragility, and security gaps.
  • A dedicated domain for dev tooling ensures that capital flows to the projects that form Ethereum’s foundations for building apps.

Dev tooling projects would be eligible if they can:

  • Demonstrate significant positive impact to the Ethereum developer community over a sustained period
  • Free software in the GNU parlance that can be utilised by developers building on Ethereum, without the requirement of any third-party commercial products or services to use them to their full potential.

Steward: Dev Tools Guild

The Dev Tools Guild unites critical Ethereum developer tooling to collectively fund projects and their maintainers (think Protocol Guild but for dev tooling), and boost coordination between protocol and dev tools developers.

Guild members consist of key open-source dev tools spanning:

  • Client Libraries: ethers.js, viem, web3.py, Web3j, Nethereum, Alloy
  • Smart Contract Languages: Solidity, Vyper
  • Frameworks & Dev Environments: Foundry, Scaffold-ETH, Ape
  • Standardization Tooling: Sourcify

Dev Tools Guild should steward the GG24 Developer Tooling domain, curating and overseeing how funds flow within the domain.

  • Our fixed membership means we have a vetted set of projects that already meet the criteria for critical Ethereum dev tooling.
  • This provides clarity and trust for Gitcoin, we know where the funds are going, and the projects are longstanding public goods.

Funding: Scaled Quadratic Funding

Dev Tooling should be a scaled quadratic round with Dev Tools Guild members represented by the guild and the number of donations scaled based on the number of member projects. The purpose of this is to remove the burden from member projects applying individually, without penalising them for being represented as a single entity.

Non-member projects that meet the eligibility criteria could also participate in the round.

3 Likes
2

100%. Dev tooling helps builders ship better apps, faster!

2 Likes
3

I am just a community member, but this is one proposal I am really enthusiastic about!

I see @owocki doing rounds on forum rating different domains, so my humble ask is to consider giving some support to DevTools guild in early stages, when such help is most impactful.

While a few proposals mention importance of community building as an abstract value this is one case where many credible projects band together under one umbrella to reach for capital that would otherwise be inaccessible.

I would hope Gitcoin is (still) a very strong entity/brand that could talk to investment funds/VCs to raise additional funds for dev tooling in similar manner Protocol Guild is very effective at funding core dev with 1% pledge.

  • Total value of donations attracted by Protocol Guild (at time donated) amounts to ~$183 million.
  • If Dev Tooling Guild grows to be 1% as successful as core development, they would be able to gather 1.8 mln .

Funds:

  • Bitwise pledged to donate 10% of their Ethereum ETF profits to Protocol Guild + PBS Foundation
  • Van Eck donated 5% ETF profits to Bitcoin Core developers.
  • EigenLayer donated 1% of token supply to Protocol Guild.
  • L2s each usually have some sort of dev-ecosystem support program or one flavour or another

My optimistic read of this is newcomers and crypto-native players are more than willing to “buy alignment” by supporting large credible organizations focused on Core Development.

Little of that funding drips down into dev tooling yet so maybe Gitcoin shining a spotlight at a new guild (with mature projects) is exactly what is needed here?

2 Likes
4

I see @owocki doing rounds on forum rating different domains, so my humble ask is to consider giving some support to DevTools guild in early stages, when such help is most impactful.

i would love to see anyone who proposed a devtooling round talking to each other. the different devtooling proposals are complementary to each other i think!

i consider all of these to be devtooling adjacent

general tooling: Gitcoin OSS Domain: Developer Tooling & Core Infrastructure - GG24 Sensemaking Report
abcouthops devtooling: GG24: Case for dev tooling - #3 by DistributedDoge
ux tooling: GG24 Sensemaking Report: User Experience & Consumer Apps
privacy tooling: The case for privacy: GG24 MACI <> Allo Capital

and i also think that other dev experience ecosystem leaders like @austingriffith could have something to add here. would be happy to see build guild in the mix to the extent it supports their charter/mission at the EF.

5 Likes
5

Draft Scorecard

2025/08/19 – Version 0.1.1

By Owocki

Prepared for abcoathup re: “GG24: Case for Dev Tooling”

(vibe-researched-and-written by an LLM using this prompt, iterated on, + edited for accuracy, quality, and legibility by Owocki himself.)

Proposal Comprehension

TITLE
GG24: Case for Dev Tooling

AUTHOR
abcoathup

URL
https://gov.gitcoin.co/t/gg24-case-for-dev-tooling/22944

TLDR

This proposal requests a dedicated GG24 domain for Developer Tooling, stewarded by the Dev Tools Guild. It aims to sustainably fund critical open-source Ethereum developer tools like Solidity, Foundry, ethers.js, web3.py, and more, via a scaled quadratic funding round. The Guild would reduce grant-seeking overhead for these projects and ensure capital flows to essential developer infrastructure.

Proposers

abcoathup – Longtime ecosystem contributor, EVM-focused, deeply embedded in dev tooling space.

Domain Experts

Dev Tools Guild Members – Include stewards and maintainers from Solidity, Vyper, ethers.js, viem, web3.py, Foundry, Scaffold-ETH, and others.
Credible practitioners with deep context and history of delivery across core infrastructure layers.

Problem

Ethereum’s application and infra layers depend heavily on developer tools, but these tools are often underfunded. Neglect leads to ecosystem fragility, security risks, and developer friction. There’s no dedicated domain for developer tooling in GG24 despite its foundational importance (unless you count the oss builders round)

Solution

Establish a GG24 domain for developer tooling, stewarded by the Dev Tools Guild. This creates a curated and high-trust funding pipeline for projects foundational to Ethereum. Uses scaled QF with representation through the guild, reducing application overhead while maintaining granularity in funding distribution.

Risks

  • Lack of coordination between overlapping tooling-related proposals in GG24 could fragment funding.
  • New governance processes around how the Dev Tools Guild allocates internally aren’t outlined (or i didnt see them)
  • Over-representation of incumbent tools may crowd out emerging ones.

Outside Funding

Not explicitly noted, but indirectly referenced via comparisons to Protocol Guild. No formal co-funding mentioned for this round, though the implication is that if this is successful, further alignment donations could follow.

Why Gitcoin?

Gitcoin is well-positioned to fill the funding gap for developer tooling as part of its broader “funding what matters” vision. The QF mechanism fits this domain well—public goods with diffuse benefits—and Gitcoin already has relationships with many of the devtooling teams.

Owocki’s Scorecard

# Criterion Score (0–2) Notes
1 Problem Focus 2 Dev tooling is a clear public good with existential importance to Ethereum’s future. This proposal clearly frames the gap.
2 Credible, High-Leverage, Evidence-Based Approach 2 Leverages existing network of credible projects and aligns with proven models like Protocol Guild.
3 Domain Expertise 2 The Guild includes maintainers of the most widely-used Ethereum dev tools. Deep and diverse expertise.
4 Co-Funding 0 No formal co-funding yet, but strong signals that follow-on alignment capital could materialize.
5 Fit-for-Purpose Capital Allocation Method 1.5 Scaled QF matches the epistemology of the problem—rewarding broad developer appreciation without overburdening applicants. But what software will they use? giveth? something they develop?
6 Execution Readiness 2 Projects are already live, trusted, and known. Guild is formed and ready to steward funding.
7 Other 1 The model builds long-term ecosystem health. Vibes are strong. Proposal could benefit from tighter coordination with adjacent efforts.

Total Score: 10.5 / 14 (and 11.5/14 if @MathildaDV says she wants to work with yall)
Confidence in Score: 95%

Feedback

Major

  • The proposal would benefit from a more transparent plan for how the Dev Tools Guild will internally allocate funds, especially as it scales. If QF (as stated) what QF software will it use?
  • Find cofunding
  • Coordination with other GG24 dev tooling proposals (UX, privacy, infra) should be made explicit to avoid redundancy or cannibalization.

Minor

  • Could improve clarity by naming the exact governance mechanism within the Guild.
  • Consider pathways for onboarding new tools or projects to the Guild over time.
  • Could cite or quantify prior underfunding of dev tooling to make the funding gap clearer.

Steel Man Case

For

This is a rare chance to fund the backbone of Ethereum—developer tools that are open-source, widely adopted, and hard to monetize. By collectivizing representation under a trusted Guild, we reduce friction while ensuring funds go to known, high-impact public goods. This could become the Protocol Guild equivalent for dev tooling.

Against

The proposal relies on a new Guild whose internal governance and fund allocation processes are still not fully detailed. There’s some risk of incumbent capture or lack of inclusivity. Also, QF rounds via a representative entity could create opacity or reduce user agency in allocating funds.

Rose / Bud / Thorn

Rose
Brings much-needed focus to an overlooked pillar of Ethereum’s stack. The proposal is well-written, practical, and backed by a coalition of credible builders.

Thorn
Need to find more funding. Need to coordinate with @MathildaDV !

Bud
Could evolve into a long-term institution akin to Protocol Guild, with its own brand, multisig, and matching partner commitments.

Feedback

Did I miss anything or get anything wrong? FF to let me know in the comments.

2 Likes
6

Reviewing against my steward scorecard:

:white_check_mark: Submission Compliance

  • Total word count well below required 800–1,200
  • Missing sections: Sensemaking Analysis, Success Metrics & Reflection
  • Fundraising plan minimal (no co-funders listed)
  • Domain Info strong (Dev Tools Guild + QF)
  • Verdict: Non-compliant

:bar_chart: Scorecard Evaluation

Total Score: 7 / 16

# Criteria Score Notes
Problem Clarity & Relevance 2 Dev tooling is existential infrastructure, problem well defined
Sensemaking Approach 0 No methodology or evidence-based analysis provided
Gitcoin Fit & Uniqueness 2 Strong Gitcoin alignment; credible steward named
Fundraising Plan 0 No co-funding details, no reality check
Capital Allocation Design 1 “Scaled QF” mentioned but lacks implementation specifics
Domain Expertise & Delivery 2 Guild includes major OSS maintainers; strong expertise
Clarity & Completeness 0 Major sections missing; proposal under word count
Gitcoin Support Required 0 Would shift execution risk to Gitcoin

:warning: Eligibility Note

The Dev Tooling domain is clearly important to us at Gitcoin, but the proposal does not meet GG24’s submission requirements. Without a complete sensemaking analysis, metrics, and fundraising details, it cannot be considered eligible in its current form.

:pushpin: Next Step

For reconsideration, this proposal would need:

  • A complete sensemaking section with sources and methodology
  • Specific success metrics and reflection criteria
  • A realistic fundraising pathway and governance details for the Guild
  • Expanded word count to meet the template minimum
1 Like