Skip to main content

User Trust and Upgradeability

Thinking aloud about user communication and version control in on-chain systems.


Note:
I’m not currently building anything that end users interact with on-chain.
My time is spent elsewhere right now, but these are conceptual notes — things I want to keep in mind for when I eventually build production-facing programs.


1. The Core Question

How do we change or extend on-chain logic without breaking user trust?

Once a program is live, users implicitly assume:

  • their deposits and state behave as promised,
  • upgrades won’t alter past behavior, and
  • any new logic is opt-in, not forced.

Trust lives at the interface boundary, not inside the opcode.


2. Engineering Patterns

PatternWhat It DoesWhy It Matters
Versioned programs (Escrow_v1, v2, v3)Deploy new binaries under new IDs.Makes change explicit; preserves immutability of prior versions.
Upgrade authority / multisigKeep upgrades under controlled keys at first.Enables rapid iteration while still auditable.
Opt-in migrationsUsers sign a “migrate” instruction to move state to the new program.Ensures agency; no silent state changes.
Immutable legacy contractsFreeze old programs once funds are withdrawn.Guarantees that previous logic cannot mutate retroactively.
Schema adaptersSmall functions that read old account data and re-serialize for new schema.Smooths transitions without manual user work.

3. Communication Patterns

UX PracticeDescriptionGoal
Plain-language release notesSummarize what changed and why.Reduce perceived risk of upgrade.
In-app prompts“A new version is available — migrate now or stay on v1.”Give clear, binary choices.
Audit or diff summaryHash or short human-readable diff of logic changes.Transparency for power users.
Grace periods / opt-out windowsKeep old logic running alongside new for a set time.Avoid coercing upgrades; build reputation.
Visual version badgesUI element showing “Program v2 (deployed Nov 2025).”Constantly signals stability and recency.

4. Why This Matters

Users don’t read Rust.
They trust predictability and choice, not technical decentralization.

When teams handle upgrades this way, they:

  • maintain confidence even while evolving fast,
  • avoid over-engineering DAO governance, and
  • create smoother UX than most Web2 apps changing APIs.

5. Working Principle

Decentralization is optional. Predictability is mandatory.

A well-communicated, opt-in upgrade path often achieves 80 % of what DAOs promise —
with none of the overhead.


6. Future Direction

When I eventually build real user-facing contracts, I plan to:

  1. Start with upgradeable multisigs for agility.
  2. Keep explicit versioning in both code and UX.
  3. Publish changelogs and migration prompts as if they were product releases.
  4. Only move to DAO-style governance if genuine decentralization becomes a necessity.