I'd also point out that this is the route that OpenAFS took. It seems to scale pretty well, with one or two commercial providers contributing funds and development hardware from support contract revenue. OpenAFS created a foundation to manage the contributions and hardware, thus providing an auditable accounting trail for how the contributed funds were used.
OpenAFS is of comparable size and complexity to Bacula. --d b > On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Pal Dorogi wrote: > > >> From my experience, and I'm sure someone's already said > this... the > >> best was to get money, at least where I work, is to consider the > >> money a support contract. My superiors like running > software without > >> a support contract even less than they like paying for things. ;) > > > > I will stand in with Ryan:) > > Ditto. ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
