We believe that the Superchain has reached a level of maturity where a basic quality standard is a good next step. An Optimism quality standard would give third parties an understandable means to trust the software of the L2/3 of the Superchain. This forum post is looking for support from the Optimism community for this idea. Even if funded, without active support from the Optimism community any quality standard would simply be an easily ignored set of documents. But creating this standard Optimism shows maturity and the advantages to using the OP Stack.
The purpose of this forum post is to test if there is interest in proceeding further.
Why develop a quality standard now?
Imagine the question āWhich is safer, Base, Blast, Mode or OP?ā The answer should be simple, they are all safe as they are all based on the same OP Stack. Instead, this one question drives 100 unanswered questions. How do you define safe? What version of OP Stack are they running? Is it the latest? Did they make changes on it? Did they test those changes? Should they? Why does the website and docs not address any of these questions? All of this makes the safety of the chains a question mark when it should be clear and transparent.
A quality standard would answer all of these questions in a simple, clear and auditable way. It would give Superchains the incentive to do the boring but not excessive effort to prove they meet the quality standard.
Broadly speaking what are the steps?
Build a quality standard
Get support from 3rd parties (protocols, bridges, insurance groups) that would prefer chains that use the standard
Have the standard approved via an OP vote
Build a OP doc set so that Superchains understand the steps to take and how to show they are following them.
Implementing the standard is optional, but if 3rd parties show advantages, the whole thing should be accepted by the chains.
Update and improve the standard as time goes by
Since I started DeFiSafety in 2020, I have been reviewing DeFi protocols on best practices and transparency. So quality standards in DeFi has been my full time activity for four years. I have found that on my own my impact is limited. This is why active support from OP members is crucial to getting a standard accepted and in use.
A quality standard for OP L2ās is low risk, low cost, achievable task that will help improve transparency and quality of the OP Superchain as it evolves. I think it deserves consideration.
For me an L3 quality standard would clearly indicate to users the version of the OP Stack they are based on, any software changes made by the L3 on the stack (and how they are tested and audited) plus indication of any changes coming weeks ahead. No blockchain user should have the software changed without notice or warning. Does Superfest add this information to the docs?
I understand that this is super boring stuff, but for some people this is extremely important. I have seen chains where all they say is āuses the OP stackā. Everything else is based on blind trust. If Optimism does not have a standard then it looks bad on the whole Superchain. Fixing this is easy, low risk and relatively low cost.
Thank you for this information. It is very relevant. An excellent read. I will be in the call on Tuesday. I believe the quality standard that I discussed could be either added to the āStandard Rollup Charterā or be referred by it to a separate document. I can see that the quality standard I am suggesting is fully in line with āLaw of Chainsā and the Standard Rollup Charter and could add some more specifics. I would love to help build the Blockspace Charter within my area of expertise.