From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 28 18:56:19 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8176106566B; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 18:56:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (pancho.soaustin.net [76.74.250.40]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 883ED8FC13; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 18:56:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id B0A495625E; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 12:56:18 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 12:56:18 -0600 From: Mark Linimon To: Michael Scheidell Message-ID: <20120228185618.GA4094@lonesome.com> References: <4F462189.3040106@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4EFDA80600B0354D@> <4F4A0E04.1080601@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <1330268018.93113.YahooMailRC@web83102.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4F4CA0A3.2010704@gmail.com> <4F4CCB45.3050106@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F4CCB45.3050106@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: status of eclipse [WAS Re: No working IDE in FreeBSD!] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 18:56:19 -0000 On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 07:40:37AM -0500, Michael Scheidell wrote: > (FreeBSD never needed to set up a 'bounty' system for people wanting > to help pay for a port, have they? If you check the archives, you'll see that there have been many discussions over the years about the need/desire/whatever to have a bounty system for FreeBSD (not just ports). However, no one has ever actually done the followup work to set one up, despite some stated good intentions. To answer your next question just before you ask it, IIUC the FreeBSD Foundation is not able to set up such a system without their US tax status as a non-profit being subject to a far greater degree of scrutiny. I'm no expert on US tax law but my understanding is that anything that looks like a "passthrough" is what's questionable, e.g., someone pays a 501c(3) to do a task with the tacit understanding that they will turn around and pay someone else to do that task. Again, check the archives. Finally, don't blame me, I just live in this country :) mcl