Update Developer Vesting Addresses

Proposal Discussion
1

This proposal updates the mint module parameters to simplify key management and access control for vested developer funding.

Current Status

The Osmosis mint parameters direct a portion of each epoch’s provisions to unlock pre-minted developer vesting funds. These provisions are distributed across 15 addresses defined at genesis.

These allocations and weights have never been updated. Most of the original vesting agreements tied to these addresses are now obsolete, and the Osmosis Foundation has become the primary entity executing development-related funding and operational responsibilities.

Despite this, the dev vesting allocation still points at these separate addresses, which are managed through Authz, creating unnecessary complexity around:

  • Key rotation
  • Operational access control
  • Accounting and transparency of funding flows

Proposed Change

This proposal simplifies the parameter to allocate all unlocking developer OSMO to a single multisig address controlled by the Osmosis Foundation.

This solves the main operational issues around developer vesting:

  • Fragmented key management → unified control

    A single address eliminates the need to maintain 15 separate keys and reduces the number of unnecessary failure points.

  • Messy access control → standard multisig governance

    Any signer updates or operational changes can be made directly through the Foundation multisig.

  • Opaque accounting → simple, auditable flow

    All vesting releases land in a single place, improving transparency for the community and internal accounting.

This is an operational and governance-hygiene change, not a change in economics. This proposal does not adjust the release rate of this OSMO; it only adjusts the target address and weighting.

Parameter Change

Mint Module

Key: DeveloperRewardsReceiver

Current Parameter:

{"address":"osmo14kjcwdwcqsujkdt8n5qwpd8x8ty2rys5rjrdjj","weight":"0.288700000000000000"},{"address":"osmo1gw445ta0aqn26suz2rg3tkqfpxnq2hs224d7gq","weight":"0.229000000000000000"},{"address":"osmo13lt0hzc6u3htsk7z5rs6vuurmgg4hh2ecgxqkf","weight":"0.162500000000000000"},{"address":"osmo1kvc3he93ygc0us3ycslwlv2gdqry4ta73vk9hu","weight":"0.109000000000000000"},{"address":"osmo19qgldlsk7hdv3ddtwwpvzff30pxqe9phq9evxf","weight":"0.099500000000000000"},{"address":"osmo19fs55cx4594een7qr8tglrjtt5h9jrxg458htd","weight":"0.060000000000000000"},{"address":"osmo1ssp6px3fs3kwreles3ft6c07mfvj89a544yj9k","weight":"0.015000000000000000"},{"address":"osmo1c5yu8498yzqte9cmfv5zcgtl07lhpjrj0skqdx","weight":"0.010000000000000000"},{"address":"osmo1yhj3r9t9vw7qgeg22cehfzj7enwgklw5k5v7lj","weight":"0.007500000000000000"},{"address":"osmo18nzmtyn5vy5y45dmcdnta8askldyvehx66lqgm","weight":"0.007000000000000000"},{"address":"osmo1z2x9z58cg96ujvhvu6ga07yv9edq2mvkxpgwmc","weight":"0.005000000000000000"},{"address":"osmo1tvf3373skua8e6480eyy38avv8mw3hnt8jcxg9","weight":"0.002500000000000000"},{"address":"osmo1zs0txy03pv5crj2rvty8wemd3zhrka2ne8u05n","weight":"0.002500000000000000"},{"address":"osmo1djgf9p53n7m5a55hcn6gg0cm5mue4r5g3fadee","weight":"0.001000000000000000"},{"address":"osmo1488zldkrn8xcjh3z40v2mexq7d088qkna8ceze","weight":"0.000800000000000000"}

Proposed Parameter:

{"address":"osmo1f3w7ved2murkx4rg9qw8fyk5mfk2285hzzsxh5","weight":"1.000000000000000000"}

Target Onchain Date: 26th November 2025

2

Doesn’t sound like a bad idea. 14 out of the 15 addresses are not used right now?

Can you indicate what the previous usages of these addresses were? Are they not linked to individuals?

3

They don’t have any declared use as far as I know. They’ve all been managed by authz for around 18 months now and I’m not aware of the original allocations at genesis.

1 Like