Roadmap Contributions
Product roadmaps showcase user-facing wins; engineering must inject harden and scale themes - audits, multisig migration, kit upgrades, indexer capacity - or launches ship on brittle foundations.
Recipe
Quick-reference recipe card - copy-paste ready.
## Q3 Engineering roadmap input
**Harden**
- Squads multisig on upgrade authority (W1)
- LiteSVM audit replay in CI (W2)
**Scale**
- Read/write RPC split (W4)
- Indexer backfill for new program events (W6)
**Grow**
- Withdraw v2 (product-led, W3-5) - depends on Harden W1When to reach for this:
- Quarterly planning offsite
- Board deck technical slide
- DAO governance forum strategy post
- Post-audit remediation scheduling
Working Example
## Dependency-aware roadmap (internal)
withdraw_v2 --> multisig_deploy
multisig_deploy --> audit_signoff
mobile_mwa --> kit_7_migration
kit_7_migration --> withdraw_v2_client
**Critical path:** audit_signoff blocks mainnet withdraw_v2What this demonstrates:
- Themes beyond feature names
- Explicit dependencies product must respect
- Critical path callout for date negotiations
Deep Dive
Inputs Engineering Owns
- Ecosystem upgrade calendar (SIMDs, Anchor releases)
- Open audit / bounty findings
- DORA and incident trends
- Infrastructure capacity (RPC, indexer)
Outputs Product Owns
- User outcome prioritization
- Marketing launch dates
- Pricing and token utility narrative
Gotchas
- Feature-only roadmap slide - Execs surprised by "invisible" security work. Fix: Harden theme with dates.
- Dates without dependencies - Mobile app promised before kit migration. Fix: Internal graph shared with PM.
- Public roadmap overpromise - Community holds dates engineering did not commit. Fix: Separate external vs internal.
- No ecosystem line items - Agave bump breaks deploy mid-quarter. Fix: Standing "ecosystem maintenance" epic.
- Roadmap not revisited after incident - Same risk reships. Fix: Post-mortem items auto-enter next quarter draft.
Alternatives
| Alternative | Use When | Don't Use When |
|---|---|---|
| Now/Next/Later | Continuous discovery | Fixed grant milestones |
| OKR-only | Exec alignment | Team needs ticket-level clarity |
| RFC pipeline as roadmap | Protocol research heavy | Consumer app |
FAQs
Who presents engineering roadmap?
Tech lead in QBR; PM integrates into unified view.
How far ahead?
Detailed 1 quarter; directional 2 quarters; themes beyond.
DAO roadmap?
Governance proposal for params; engineering blog for infra - label each clearly.
Slip communication?
Early flag with trade-off options, not day-of delay.
Capacity model?
Engineer count x focus factor (0.6-0.7) minus on-call and meetings.
Design partners?
Roadmap lane for beta protocols with explicit support cost.
Kill criteria?
Feature removed from roadmap when spike fails - document in ADR.
Align with sales?
Enterprise commitments reviewed against harden theme capacity.
Visual format?
Swimlanes: Grow / Harden / Scale with dependency arrows.
Review cadence?
Monthly health check; full replan quarterly.
Related
- Prioritizing Platform & Tech Debt - debt portfolio
- Stakeholder Communication - external messaging
- Tracking Ecosystem Change - upgrade inputs
Stack versions: This page was written for Agave 4.1.1, Solana CLI 3.0.10, Anchor 0.32.1, anchor-lang 0.32.1, Rust 1.91.1, @solana/kit 7.0.0, Surfpool 0.12.0, and LiteSVM 0.6.x.