We believe this is a good pivot for the team. It is better to focus on Polkadot SDK-specific things rather than client implementations.

Thanks for the team's contribution. Maybe it's a better way core team members join fellowship.

It would be great to see the fellowship weigh in on the impact and need for these improvements.

I would like to see what position the Fellowship takes on this proposal, especially to understand its weight and technical validity.

We do not support the idea of funding the development and maintenance of the Polkadot SDK through the Treasury.

client diversity is paramount, even if temporary.

Not my area of expertise so I’d rather abstain than make an uninformed decision.

Although I'm confident that Quadrivium is perfectly equipped with the merit to deliver, I find the shift to treasury funding for the development and maintenance of the Polkadot SDK a premature move that requires better preparation, wider community discussion, and consensus.

Lately the treasury has been made to bear the brunt of the development cost of many SDKs, some of which are perceived as must-haves while my impression is that many are "nice to have but not used a lot". I would like to see the technical fellowship take some leadership here to either have a second circle of developers to accommodate these instead.