Thank you @Llamaxyz @TokenLogic for calling attention and proposing a rational solution to this limitation that has been impairing the growth of LST protocols primarily rooted/contributing to AAVE.
Although this increase is significant compared to the previous ones, based on foregoing governance discussions and growing demand for LSTs on Polygon, this cap (40M) would likely allow dependent protocols to sustain long enough (without interruption) for the on-chain liquidity to catch up, while justifying the continuation of strategies’ development and LST providers’ incentivization.
One or the other, that said;
While security has to remain a must, it seems to me that the disparity between these two caps (+2M vs +10M) could set a tone that might affect long-term partners’ efforts. Based on previous increases, 2M would likely be filled in hours, leading to a similar proposal for identical purposes, thus costing everyone’s time and effort.
If the synchronized price adapter solution is the way to go, I am in favor. Until then, if there was a way to move on in a non-conservative way without further impeding the ecosystem growth, that would be, in my opinion, optimal for all parties involved.