Gitcoin OSS Domain: Developer Tooling & Core Infrastructure - GG24 Sensemaking Report

[MathildaDV]

Gitcoin OSS Domain: Developer Tooling & Core Infrastructure - GG24 Sensemaking Report

1. Problem & Impact

Ethereum’s developer infrastructure is underfunded. The tools that secure billions in value receive minimal funding while user-facing applications attract most investment.

Our interviews with ecosystem stakeholders showed that better tooling could prevent many hacks and vulnerabilities, yet these tools remain underfunded. Security incidents result in lost funds and erode trust, discouraging developers and enterprises from building on Ethereum.

Nine of twelve stakeholders in our sensemaking interviews identified infrastructure as the most underfunded area. Teams maintaining libraries receive sporadic funding despite widespread usage. Development frameworks rely on GitHub sponsorships and occasional grants. Most infrastructure teams lack even these limited options. Multiple stakeholders emphasized that new teams entering the space require ongoing support, yet they lack a clear path to access it.

Teams could earn more through auditing and consulting services, but commercial work takes time away from improving core infrastructure. They choose between abandoning their public goods mission or struggling with inadequate resources. Project maintainers we interviewed explained that technical teams lack time and skills for fundraising, which requires business development capabilities that technical builders don’t have.

Without tooling support, developers resort to more permissioned solutions to prevent hacks, which in turn sacrifices Ethereum’s decentralization. The ecosystem loses millions to duplicated efforts as teams rebuild similar tooling independently. A new AI model saw millions of developers adopt it quickly, while Ethereum’s developer base remains orders of magnitude smaller. Better tooling could help close this gap.

2. Sensemaking Analysis

We conducted structured interviews with stakeholders across the Ethereum ecosystem, including Ethereum Foundation representatives, infrastructure project maintainers, and ecosystem builders. These conversations explored underfunded areas, hidden opportunities, funding criteria, and coordination failures. See the detailed sensemaking report here.

Community proposals submitted for GG24 domains provided validation. The community-submitted “Case for Dev Tooling” proposal aligned with our interview findings, demonstrating grassroots recognition of this problem.

We aggregated findings through thematic analysis, identifying patterns across stakeholder responses. The infrastructure invisibility theme emerged consistently across diverse perspectives. Foundation representatives, project maintainers, and ecosystem builders independently identified the same issues: small teams maintaining dependencies, limited monetization options for libraries and languages, and talent drain from infrastructure to commercial work.

The evidence from interviews, community proposals, and ecosystem data creates a clear mandate. Infrastructure is the foundation everything else is built on. The ecosystem recognizes this, but hasn’t translated that understanding into sustainable funding mechanisms.

3. Gitcoin’s Unique Role & Fundraising

Gitcoin has run developer tooling and infrastructure rounds for years, establishing deep knowledge of what works and what doesn’t. Our experience shows that infrastructure needs different support models than consumer applications.

Our network enables coordination across fragmented efforts. We can aggregate contributions from multiple L2s and protocols into meaningful support for core tools. We have established relationships across the ecosystem. Infrastructure teams know Gitcoin and trust our processes. Teams maintaining language infrastructure seek the coordinated funding Gitcoin provides.

The fundraising outlook is positive. Infrastructure benefits every L2 and major protocol. L2s spending millions on ecosystem growth recognize that better tooling multiplies their investments’ impact.

Every dollar invested in tooling multiplies through improved developer productivity and reduced security incidents. This is a strategic investment in shared infrastructure that benefits all participants.

Our track record speaks for itself. We’ve distributed millions to infrastructure projects over the years and understand the unique challenges these teams face. We know how to evaluate technical merit beyond surface metrics and have processes to ensure funding reaches projects that need it most.

Source: A longitudinal assessment of Gitcoin Grants impact on open source developer activity | Open Source Observer

4. Success Measurement & Reflection

Success in six months means improvements in infrastructure sustainability and developer experience. We’ll measure projects, focusing on predictable funding for twelve months forward, increased library downloads and tool adoption, and documented security improvements resulting from enhanced tooling support.

Impact appears in developer testimonials and ecosystem behavior changes. Success means infrastructure maintainers no longer consider abandoning projects for commercial work. It means new experimental languages and tools are emerging because creators see support pathways. It means preventing security incidents and developer frustration.

We’ll collaborate with OSO (Open Source Observer) on impact reporting to track quantitative and qualitative indicators. Download statistics and GitHub activity provide baseline metrics. Developer surveys will measure confidence in infrastructure stability. OSO’s metrics framework will help us move beyond vanity metrics to measure actual ecosystem impact.

The satisfaction test: in twelve months, will the Ethereum community view infrastructure funding as solved or an ongoing crisis? Success means infrastructure teams focusing on innovation rather than survival. It means developers choosing Ethereum because of the tooling, not despite it.

In GG20, we renewed our focus back to OSS, and because of this and launching four specific rounds, we were able to double the number of projects participating compared to Round 19.

Source: https://gitcoin.mirror.xyz/GyT9ZE_PuopPVwSlgRIF-o7cm_ZTCqcXBKXMCNkc1Sk

Gitcoin’s history of running these rounds provides baseline data for comparison. We can show year-over-year improvements in project sustainability, developer satisfaction, and ecosystem capabilities. We have equally increased our community participation within the rounds, by focusing on a community-operated onboarding program model, supporting grantees with 1:1 guidance and education. It ensured smaller teams could meaningfully participate and minimized drop-off among less-experienced applicants.

Source: Gitcoin Grants 23: A Milestone Round for Public Goods Funding | Gitcoin Blog

This isn’t our first infrastructure round; it’s the evolution of a proven model. We will continue working with partners such as Open Source Observer to learn and iterate moving forward. See the GG23 Retrospective for a recap on the first multi-mechanism OSS program we ran.

5. Domain Information

Are you proposing a domain for GG24? Yes, we propose Developer Tooling & Core Infrastructure as a domain for GG24.

Who will be the domain experts? We are in discussions with technical experts from the ecosystem who understand infrastructure dependencies and can evaluate technical merit. Final domain expert selection is in progress, but these domains will be largely managed and run by Gitcoin core & Team Tiger, designing the domains alongside OSO and Deep Funding teams.

Which mechanism(s) will you be pitching to run the domain on? We will use Quadratic Funding for early-stage projects and Deep Funding for mature builders. We intend to work with OSO (Open Source Observer) on scoping eligibility criteria and segmenting projects between these two mechanisms based on maturity and track record.

Do you foresee the domain including multiple sub-rounds? Yes, we propose four sub-rounds:

• Core Infrastructure (compilers, languages, critical libraries)
  • Early Stage Builders through Quadratic Funding
  • Mature Builders through Deep Funding
• Developer Experience Tools (SDKs, frameworks, debugging tools)
  • Early Stage Builders through Quadratic Funding
  • Mature Builders through Deep Funding

We are open to collaborating on other domains as operators, depending on voting results.

[owocki]

Draft Scorecard

2025/08/18 - Version 0.1.1

By Owocki

Prepared for MathildaDV re: “Gitcoin OSS Domain: Developer Tooling & Core Infrastructure - GG24 Sensemaking Report”

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

Proposal Comprehension

TITLE
Gitcoin OSS Domain: Developer Tooling & Core Infrastructure - GG24 Sensemaking Report

AUTHOR
MathildaDV

URL
https://gov.gitcoin.co/t/gitcoin-oss-domain-developer-tooling-core-infrastructure-gg24-sensemaking-report/23022

TLDR

You propose Developer Tooling and Core Infrastructure as a GG24 domain that Gitcoin will operate. Rationale: infra and dev tools are underfunded, high leverage, and require tailored mechanisms. Plan: dual mechanism with QF for early stage and Deep Funding for mature builders, impact measured with OSO, with four subrounds that separate Core Infra and DevX across maturity levels. You are exploring coalition funding with L2s and protocols.

Proposers

Gitcoin program lead, led on forum by MathildaDV, with Team Tiger as operators and collaboration with OSO and Deep Funding.

MathildaDV has run multiple OSS rounds including dedicated infra rounds and the multi-mechanism GG23 program. OSO provides open source impact analytics. Deep Funding brings milestone based capital allocation for mature teams.

Domain Experts

Final selection in progress. You note discussions with technical experts who can assess compilers, languages, critical libraries, SDKs, and tooling. Likely other relationships are here given history.

Anticipated profiles include maintainers and reviewers of widely used Ethereum tooling, language teams, and infra maintainers. Names and commitments not yet listed.

OSO/DeepFunding relationships at the table.

Problem

Infra and dev tooling are invisible and underfunded. Small teams maintain compilers, languages, and critical libraries that secure large value yet lack predictable funding. This causes security risk, duplicated effort, and talent drain into consulting.

Solution

Stand up a GG24 domain with two mechanisms: QF for early stage signal and community discovery, Deep Funding for mature builders with clear milestones. Operate four subrounds that distinguish Core Infra and DevX across maturity, coordinate co-funding with L2s and protocols, and measure outcomes with OSO using repo activity, adoption, and qualitative testimonials.

Risks

1. Co-funding is an assumption, not yet a commitment. Without anchors from L2s or protocol treasuries, round scale could undershoot ambitions.
2. Metrics gaming and vanity stats risk. OSO helps but needs guardrails and qualitative review.
3. Parallel community effort: the Dev Tools Guild also proposed stewarding a dev tooling domain. Lack of coordination here could fragment the space or create duplicative processes.
4. Time to October is tight for expert sourcing, eligibility definitions, and coalition fundraising if those are not already pre-wired.
5. Calling yourselves “Gitcoin core” undermines the new decentralized direction of Gitcoin. Recommend refactoring the semantics to be “Gitcoin program core team” and “Gitcoin OSS round core team”.

Outside Funding

Positive signals and intent to coordinate with L2s and protocols, but no specific written commitments or amounts in the thread. Treat as probable but not certain.

Why Gitcoin?

Does Gitcoin have something unique to offer here? Yes. Proposer has repeatable infra round ops, multi-mechanism experience from GG23, a large matching donor network, and OSO integration for measurement. The team can convene multiple funders and run community-legible processes at scale. This is a fit with institutional memory from past OSS rounds.

Owockis scorecard

#	Criterion	Score(0-2)	Notes
1	Problem Focus – Clearly frames a real problem, one that is a priority, avoids solutionism	2	Underfunded infra is well evidenced and high priority for Ethereum. Clear articulation of why it matters.
2	Credible, High leverage, Evidence-Based Approach – Solutions are high leverage and grounded in credible research	2	Dual mechanism fits maturity spectrum. Prior GG rounds, OSO measurement, and sensemaking interviews create a credible backbone.
3	Domain Expertise – Proposal has active involvement from recognized experts	2	Experts are locked in
4	Co-Funding – Has financial backing beyond just Gitcoin	0	Strong likelihood via L2s and protocols, but no signed anchors listed yet.
5	Fit-for-Purpose Capital Allocation Method – Methodology matches the epistemology of the domain	2	QF for early signal and Deep Funding for milestones is apt for tooling and infra.
6	Execution Readiness – Can deliver meaningful results by October	2	Gitcoin has ops muscle for OSS rounds. Risk is expert roster and coalition timelines.
7	Other - general vibe check and other stuff I may have missed above	1	Directionally right. Needs sharper coordination with Dev Tools Guild or other more bottoms up developer focused community (build guild maybe?). Needs outside funding. Shoring these things up in GG24 will set us on a good course for GG25+ beyond.

Score

Total Score: 11 / 14
Confidence in score: 70%

Feedback:

Major

• secure at least two anchor co-funders with written intent and ranges. specify how their capital routes across the four subrounds.
• work with other devtools proposers to see if you can work together.

Minor

• publish eligibility and maturity segmentation rubric for QF vs Deep Funding with examples.
• outline anti-gaming measures for both mechanisms and how OSO outputs will be interpreted alongside qualitative reviews.

Steel man case for/against:

For

This is the most leverage per dollar in the ecosystem. The plan focuses on compilers, languages, critical libs, SDKs, and debugging frameworks that every L2 and app depend on. Gitcoin can convene coalitions and run both QF and milestone funding with credible measurement. If anchored by L2s, the domain can meaningfully de-risk security and accelerate developer productivity.

Against

Co-funding is not locked, which could cap impact. Overlap with the Dev Tools Guild proposal could fragment community buy-in and confuse applicants. If eligibility and segmentation are fuzzy, funds may diffuse across nice-to-have tools rather than critical dependencies.

Rose/ Bud/Thorn

ROSE
Strong fit to Gitcoin’s core competency. Dual-mechanism design acknowledges the maturity spectrum in tooling. Measurement with OSO is a step beyond vanity stats.

THORN
Missing signed co-funders at proposal time. Potential duplication with Dev Tools Guild unless roles are harmonized. Need firm anti-gaming guardrails.

BUD
If you land 2 to 3 anchor L2s and stand up an expert committee with transparent rubrics, this domain could become a durable coalition that persists beyond GG24 and sets a new standard for infra funding.

Feedback

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

[deltajuliet]

Woo hoo! Thanks @MathildaDV — excited to see this one evolve and appreciate all the work you’ve put into the org and the program. Evaluated using my steward scorecard, with special attention to governance, scope clarity, and execution alignment (while remaining as neutral as possible).

---

Submission Compliance

• Clear articulation of problem, approach, and mechanisms
• Dual mechanism (QF + Deep Funding) is fit-for-purpose and well-aligned
• Four sub-rounds scoped, with historical data + operator experience noted
• Final expert list and co-funding commitments still pending
• Verdict: Compliant and strategically aligned, but external scaffolding needs work

---

Scorecard Evaluation

Total Score: 13 / 16

Criteria	Score	Notes
Problem Clarity	2	Clear articulation of infra underfunding, backed by interviews and impact data
Sensemaking Approach	2	Ecosystem interviews + OSO validation shows synthesis, not just narrative
Gitcoin Fit	2	OSS + funding mechanisms is the core of what we do — this domain leans into that strength
Fundraising Plan	1	No signed anchors yet — strong signals but execution hinges on converting them
Capital Allocation Design	2	QF for early, Deep Funding for mature is the right combo here
Domain Expertise	2	Strong operator team with deep experience, but community reviewers still TBD
Clarity & Completeness	2	Clear deliverables, measurable KPIs, and ecosystem scope defined
Gitcoin Support Required	0	Operated by Gitcoin team — support is built in, but decentralization path should be clarified

---

Feedback & Notes

• Community Trust & Governance: Since Gitcoin is the proposer and operator here, clarity on review committee neutrality, eligibility criteria, and oversight mechanisms will help mitigate “self-dealing” critiques.
• Coordination with Dev Tools Guild: There’s risk of duplication. Even if both proposals stand alone, signal intent to coordinate or consolidate scope.
• Funding Confirmation: A single signed L2 or ecosystem partner would go a long way in signaling credibility at launch. Would love to see Gitcoin stewards line this up in the next few weeks.
• Narrative Calibration: Since we don’t have a “Gitcoin Core” anymore, would shift to “Gitcoin OSS program team” to better reflect Gitcoin’s evolving governance architecture.

---

Strong Support

This is a strategically aligned, high-leverage domain — and we know what it takes to run it. That said, we also need to be mindful of optics, decentralization, and delivering measurable impact beyond our own walls.

[sepu85]

Thanks for this proposal on the OSS Domain — the focus on developer tooling and core infrastructure feels essential for the resilience of Ethereum and the broader web3 ecosystem.

Our own proposal took a different direction: instead of creating a new domain, we’re exploring whether CollabBerry’s peer-based contributor allocation and accountability tooling could serve as a cross-domain mechanism.

What caught our attention here is the emphasis on sustainability for open-source contributors. From our perspective, funding OSS is critical, but so is ensuring that once grants reach a project, the internal allocation among contributors is fair, transparent, and incentive-aligned. This “last mile” challenge is where OSS often struggles: contributors feel unseen, undercompensated, or misaligned.

CollabBerry is experimenting with mechanisms that enable peer-reviewed allocation and payout automation, designed specifically for open-source contexts where contribution patterns can be diverse and hard to track. We’re curious if you see this type of contributor-level accountability as complementary to the OSS domain’s goals of strengthening developer infrastructure.

[thedevanshmehta]

Thanks to @MathildaDV for initiating this proposal! Based on extensive consultation and feedback, we have come up with an updated version of the developer tooling and core infrastructure round that addresses the concerns raised by @owocki & @deltajuliet

GG24 Dev Tooling & Infrastructure Domain (Updated)

Ethereum’s developer tooling & infrastructure is underfunded. The tools that secure billions in value receive minimal funding while user-facing applications attract most investment. Nine of twelve stakeholders in our sensemaking interviews identified infrastructure as the most underfunded area. Teams maintaining libraries receive sporadic funding despite widespread usage. Development frameworks rely on GitHub sponsorships and occasional grants. Most infrastructure teams lack even these limited options. Multiple stakeholders emphasized that new teams entering the space require ongoing support, yet they lack a clear path to access it.

We are proposing to run a Dev Tooling & Infrastructure domain, including a Deep Funding round for more established open source repositories already important to Ethereum while focusing the Quadratic Funding round on projects as a whole (early stage and mature).

Mechanism	Size	Summary	Rationale
Deep Funding	$350,000	Prediction market on Seer where traders bet on the value an individual repo would receive if it was evaluated. Weights derived from markets determine allocations, example here	Solves granularity and fairness problems via focus on repos, moves away from brand or social signaling-based allocations, keeps allocation weights current and reusable
Quadratic Funding	$200,000	Matching based on QF formula (emphasizing breadth of support), run via Giveth with tailored eligibility	Encourages community participation in funding decisions, works well for broadly supported, user-facing tool

Deep Funding Round (Experimental Prediction Market Model)

Objective:

Allocate funds based on market-based predictions of a repo’s value to Ethereum if evaluated by a jury. Enables granular, repo-level allocation using scalable, incentive-aligned mechanisms.

Deep Funding Round

We request a total of $200,000 from the Gitcoin matching pool for allocation via the Deep Funding mechanism. $175,000 will go towards projects in the round, while $25,000 is kept for operating expenses to conduct the round (model builders, liquidity for repos to be traded on and opex for Seer.)

This round has a matching partner in Vitalik Buterin and the Ethereum Foundation, with a commitment of $175,000 to the repos and $55,000 incurred in operating expenses for running the mechanism itself.

Broadly defined, the allocation mechanism is based on models or AI agents predicting the value of a repo to Ethereum if it were assessed by a jury. Traders win or lose money depending on actual jury evaluation of repos, which they can purchase or have randomly spot checked. In case a repo is not evaluated, capital is returned to traders at no loss while the weights of a repo are still used to allocate funding to it.

Deep Funding Round Eligibility

• Applications are per GitHub repository, rather than per organization/project, with a maximum of 128 repositories. For this round, only Github repos can apply. Please do not apply with your organization. Instead, send us the direct link of your Github repo; more than 1 repo from the same organization can apply. An example of accepted repos from earlier rounds can be found here
  
• Your repo should be valuable to the Ethereum base layer and those building on top of it, as judged by an eligibility committee. This round is not for apps.

Some of the repo categories that are eligible (taken from Octant Epoch 8);

• Direct protocol improvements (consensus, execution, data availability, core networking)

• Shared infrastructure (clients, testnets & tooling, p2p networking stacks, security & formal-verification frameworks, transparency)

• Open dashboards, datasets, or studies (roll-ups, bridges, MEVs - resulting insights must strengthen Ethereum)

• Protocol-level research + specification work (advancing Ethereum’s roadmap)

• Repo must be open source, with an OSI approved license
  
  Repos with licenses that are source available but not open source will be desk rejected.

• Part of the funding will be kept for dependencies of the qualifying repos.

Number of repos accepted to the round

• A maximum of 128 repos can receive any funding at all.

Since 45 repos are already in the round, at most an additional 83 more repos can enter this round for GG24. An eligibility committee shall decide upon entry into the round.

Amount in liquidity or trading subsidy

• This round will run on the prediction marketplace Seer. The Ethereum Foundation has covered $55,000 as opex, with 3 broad categories of expenditures

• $30,000 as liquidity for repos to be traded on

• $20,000 as subsidy to model builders

• $5,000 overhead to Seer

• We estimate an additional ~$25,000 in Opex from Gitcoin for these buckets

Cofunding or sizing domain

• $175,000 is allocated via a commitment by Vitalik to fund through this mechanism based on weights obtained

• From the Gitcoin matching pool, an equivalent amount ($175,000) is requested for a total pool size of $350,000 via deep funding for at most 128 repos plus their dependencies

• The opex in this round for getting weights between the repos is a total $80,000: $55,000 from EF and $25,000 from Gitcoin

Why Deep Funding as an Allocation Mechanism?

Problem # 1: Existing credibly neutral funding mechanisms do not scale very well. For example, Grow the Pie, an Ethereum analytics dashboard, received the same amount of funding in the Octant epoch 8 as Protocol Guild, a collection of all consensus and execution clients on Ethereum, which is not reflective of value to Ethereum.

Solution: The Deep Funding round will be more granular in its approach, considering grantees at the repo level instead of the project or brand level. So Protocol Guild & Dev Tools Guild cannot apply as entities, but they may submit applications on behalf of their member repositories (with funds directed to Protocol Guild or Dev Tools Guild respectively if they choose, or use Merit Systems to grow their contributor base).

Problem # 2: Participants in decentralized systems should earn rewards across a vast network based on contribution instead of social games or their ability to coordinate a crowd.

Solution: A funding mechanism that scales human judgment. Specifically, setting up a prediction market where traders, models and bots bet on the value a repo would receive if it was to be evaluated for its contribution to Ethereum by a committee. Unlike regular prediction markets that resolve based on an objective truth in the world, these markets would resolve based on subjective assessment by jurors.

Problem #3: The weights obtained in various rounds don’t remain fresh and instead get outdated with each passing day.

Solution: Deep Funding has a dependency graph with repos relevant to Ethereum. Models bet on the value of these repos if they were assessed by a jury. This keeps the weights fresh and relevant, letting other funders deploy money into the graph to support Ethereum even beyond GG24.

A detailed writeup of the mechanism is found here:

Deep Funding Market Mechanism - HackMD

Timeline

Here is the estimated timeline of events leading up to the GG24 Dev Tooling and Infrastructure Deep Funding round

1. Ongoing competition on Pond to get weights between 45 seed nodes important to Ethereum, ending September 30 (funded by EF at $25,000).
   Concurrently, a multiscalar market on Seer where traders can submit their predictions and also put money behind their answers to influence weights. Unlike Ponds approach of prizes, the payout function to model builders in Seer depends on liquidity put into the market, the amount other participants put in to back their predictions and the accuracy of submission

In GG24, we expand the multiscalar prediction market on Seer with an additional 83 repos.

2. A simple scalar market is launched on Seer for each of the repos in GG24 to let traders to bet on their “Originality Score” determining the funds staying with repos vs passed on to their dependencies. For example, Solidity is built with a dependency minimization framework and may have an originality score of 0.8, while Remix has many dependencies so would have a lower score. This market will resolve based on subjective assessment by jurors for a subset of the repos.

Upon conclusion of GG24, $350,000 is allocated based on the prevailing weights between repos and their originality score. In case people suspect market manipulation, manual jury evaluations are triggered on specific repos and their judgments will have precedence over the weights derived from trading activity. These jury evaluations also determine P & L for the traders participating in these markets.

3. After GG24 ends, we launch a competition on Pond for getting weights between dependencies of the seed nodes (funded by EF at $25,000). While seed nodes can claim their share of funds immediately upon GG24 conclusion, the money for their dependencies is kept in abeyance until the competition predicting dependency weights is concluded.

Deep Funding Operators

@clesaege from Seer will be primary lead and host of the deep funding edition for GG24, with Devansh Mehta at the Ethereum Foundation serving as round operator.

@conor10 will also help with the following functions, including recruiting other OSS contributors where needed

1. Vetting the applicant repos so we only have 128 eligible ones
2. Advising on which repos are overweighted so we trigger jury evaluations on those
3. Helping with jury selection to resolve particular markets

Team Tiger and Gitcoin will help in an operational capacity where required, with @MathildaDV serving as a point of contact.

Dev Tooling & Web3 Infrastructure Quadratic Round

Objective: Empower communities to direct funds toward public goods through matching based on the number of contributors, rather than total donation size.

The Quadratic Funding round within this domain will focus on empowering earlier stage projects to shed light on what they are building as they are growing in the space, enabling community participation through the signalling that QF brings. The larger goal is strengthening the Ethereum ecosystem’s foundational infrastructure by supporting projects crucial for its development, scalability, and security, and improving developer efficiency in the OSS and Web3 ecosystems through supportive tooling and libraries.

Round Size

Matching Pool: $200k
Opex: $25k

Eligibility

Ethical and Community Standards

• No Hateful Content: We firmly stand against discrimination and hate speech.
• Deceiving Users: Prohibited is any content that could harm users or lead to unintended consequences.
• Falsification: Attempts to falsify contributions, including Sybil attacks or other manipulative practices, are strictly banned.
• Fraud & Impersonation: Projects must accurately represent their affiliation and intentions to maintain transparency and trust.
• No Quid Pro Quo & Bribery: Incentives in exchange for donations are disallowed, maintaining the integrity of the contribution process.
• Advertising Restrictions: Utilizing grants for direct promotional activities or sales is prohibited.
• Funding Caps: Projects with significant external funding may be reconsidered to ensure equitable distribution of resources.
• Legal Compliance: Mandatory is the adherence to all applicable laws and regulations for participation.

Open-Source Principles and Project Activity

• Licensing Requirement: Projects must be fully open source, offering “source available” for anyone to fork, modify, and redistribute, embodying the essence of open-source collaboration.
• Activity Metrics: Demonstrated established and ongoing development activity as evidenced by GitHub commit history.

This eligibility framework is devised to ensure that the projects we support are aligned with the foundational values of the Gitcoin Grants Program and actively contribute to the growth and integrity of the OSS ecosystem. Projects that violate these guidelines will face disqualification from consideration, underscoring our dedication to maintaining the highest standards of ethical conduct and community engagement.

Projects fulfilling the licensing requirements and displaying sufficient activity metrics will be directly approved. Those partially meeting these standards will be subject to a manual review process, while projects failing to satisfy any of the criteria will be deemed ineligible.

Target Areas for Funding

• Core Client Teams & Development: Support for teams behind essential Ethereum clients (e.g., Geth, Nethermind) and projects enhancing core network functionality.
• Staking Infrastructure and Diversity: Initiatives improving staking processes and promoting client diversity to strengthen network security and resilience.
• Security and Scalability Innovations: Research and development aimed at bolstering the network’s security through EIPs and scalability solutions like sharding and rollups.
• Wallet Security and Privacy Technologies: Innovations in wallet security, recovery solutions, privacy pools, and zero-knowledge proofs, aiming to protect users and advance voting mechanisms.
• Standardization and Future-Proofing: Efforts to standardize crucial technologies and develop forward-thinking solutions, such as account abstraction and statelessness.
• Client integration libraries
• Development frameworks.
• Smart contract development frameworks that enable secure, efficient smart contract development.

Round Specific Criteria

• Significant reduction of development barriers or enhancement of project efficiency.

• Demonstrated support and usage within the developer community.

• Infrastructure Impact: Projects must demonstrate a significant contribution to the Ethereum network’s infrastructure, addressing both foundational needs and innovative solutions to current challenges.

• Engagement in Pioneering Development: A focus on pioneering technologies or approaches that promise to elevate the Ethereum ecosystem, particularly in enhancing privacy, interoperability, and user experience.

Evaluation Process

Our evaluation process combines quantitative measures, such as adherence to open-source licensing and active development indicators, with qualitative assessments, including the project’s contribution to the OSS ecosystem, community engagement, and innovation.

Quadratic Funding Round Operators

@karmaticacid from Giveth will be be primary lead and host of the Quadratic Funding edition for GG24, with @MathildaDV , @Sov and Team Tiger serving as round operators.