We broadly support the proposed cross-chain deployment framework.
- By focusing the Morpho team’s core efforts on protocol development, while leaving frontend builds and incentive layers to independent contributors, this approach can optimize Morpho’s resource distribution.
- We like the plan to start deployments in “tier two” mode, then gradually allocate more support and resources as certain chains demonstrate potential.
- This measured strategy encourages innovation by diversifying user experiences and brands.
That said, we would appreciate more clarity on the points below.
-
Could you provide rough cost estimates—both financial and in person-months—for deploying the protocol code and frontend support on additional chains?
Having these figures would help us assess the feasibility and rationale of adopting this framework. -
Is there a realistic approach to streamline deployments across multiple chains rather than tackling each one individually?
We are aware of the Oku proposal as one such idea. If there are other approaches you have considered or are currently evaluating, could you please share what alternatives were explored and offer insight into why certain options were favored or ruled out? -
For operators like Moonwell that build frontends on top of the Morpho protocol, what viable business models can they pursue?
Given certain constraints, it might be faster and more cost-effective for the core team to directly budget for and hire developers rather than relying on community-driven solutions. We are not questioning the core purpose of the proposed framework, but rather seeking guidance on the scalability of this community-led approach.