Am Donnerstag, 22. September 2011, 10:46:10 schrieb John Tapsell: > On 22 September 2011 10:04, Robert Klotzner <robert.klotz...@gmx.at> wrote: > > As I am thinking about creating a platform for exactly this purpose, you > > made me curious. Could you point me to the thread where this was > > discussed or maybe some could highlight the basic reasons why this idea > > was shot down? > Have a google around for old threads, but the objections are usually > along the lines of that: > > 1. It might de-motivate the developers that code for free.
It's not like users will pay for bugs/features that developers will work on anyway but rather those issues that nobody wants to work on without any additional incentive. Further, there are payed devs already, be it by donations or some company. Hence other than the source of money nothing changes. I did not read anything about e.g. the nepomuk devs complaining that Sebastian gets money because of working on a project they contribute to for free. > 2. What to do if someone commits a bad fix that another developer then > has to go in and fix. Who then gets the money? Good question. How is it solved with the commits of the currently payed devs? Regressions are introduced all the time, so there would be nothing new here. But of course the money should only be payed after the code was proven to be worth it. Maybe one minor release without any major bugs. Or what about giving x% to some reviewer who then takes responsibility for that commit as well. Those reviewers could be KDE devs who are known to be reliable. The reviewboard does already handle a lot of commits that way. > 3. It might create a situation where someone writes a feature for > money but won't maintain it. Do we want more unmaintained half-broken > features? This happens all the time without paying people. The folder-view was one of those examples. Yet with a bounty there would be an incentive for people to take over maintainership/fix bugs for something unsexy that nobody else wants to take care of. > 4. What to do when a bug fix requires changes done by lots of people, > who gets the actual money? Will it cause resentment to those who > helped but didn't get the money? As I stated already, there is this notion of payed vs unpayed developers already. > This has been tried before. An ubuntu brainstorm on it: > http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/item/1295/ > > Read the comments there and duplicates for more info and a list of > existing websites: > > http://www.cofundos.org/ > http://bountycounty.org/ > http://www.opensourcexperts.com/bountylist.html > https://www.bountysource.com/ Thanks for the links, I'll read through them. :-) Sven >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
