From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 18 19:05:28 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFE4C1065672; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:05:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanegomi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-tul01m020-f182.google.com (mail-tul01m020-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6429A8FC18; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:05:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obcwo16 with SMTP id wo16so5842100obc.13 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:05:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JQnJ5RnNf/yQ6KwUMFdcXd5PdYGn19tlp1kzUqkN4Gs=; b=Qpl9ROEt6bSNk/e6GhtIHUqGp5eyWNjXKCso7isGgeVpbAuNNX2L0yEFMZY3jt2N9y D8dhLOsnZNZeqGaUCmyKm0oNQdO9e/3kNMvl8fnKb0kzbGe2P7dpRsKA8pZ7HRuwl1Go /NVTaIgcduRDUubx/5Y4LNVdkCLtpDeDU0TqA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.41.5 with SMTP id b5mr17157319obl.79.1326913527793; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:05:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.182.5.162 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:05:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4F15C44F.1030208@freebsd.org> <1326836797.1669.234.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <4F16019F.2060300@FreeBSD.org> <1326843399.1669.249.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <4F160B99.1060001@FreeBSD.org> <4F16900A.90905@FreeBSD.org> <4F170623.4080006@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:05:27 -0800 Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: Adam Vande More Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Robert Watson , Igor Mozolevsky , Andriy Gapon , Ian Lepore Subject: Re: FreeBSD has serious problems with focus, longevity, and lifecycle X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:05:28 -0000 On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Adam Vande More w= rote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Julian Elischer wro= te: > >> >> we really need a bud-submitting-user advocate.. >> >> Someone (need not have a commit bit) who doesn't take charge of the patc= h, >> but, rather, >> acts as a project manager in hte process of getting it in. >> i.e. finding, and then pinging the approriate developer, and occasionall= y >> nagging them or >> finding an alternate dev if the first choice is unresponsive. >> >> diplomatic skill would be important.. =A0maybe a woman might be best in >> this job as the developers tend to not want to be rude to women :-) =A0. >> > > I've suggested this before without much response, but since this thread > seems to be encouraging repetition I'll give it another go. =A0;) > > I think a bounty system would be very effective(e.g. micro-donations of > recent political campaigns) in getting many of these problems resolved. > The main problem with a bounty system is getting people to pay since > certain needs/desires lose their urgency over time. =A0To address this, t= he > system needs to be an escrow type setup where money is pooled until proje= ct > is complete, then payment in full is given. > > There are large barriers to entry in setting up such a system though such > as legal and financial hurdles. =A0I don't believe the technical hurdles = are > over-whelming and I would be willing develop a web front end for such a > system. =A0Because of the barriers I believe such a system should be setu= p > and spun off by the FreeBSD Foundation and I don't want to do any dev > unless there is some momentum. Bounty systems have not come into existence because of the potential legal ramifications w.r.t. distribution of funds, responsibility of completion of work, and a number of other points I've not listed here. iXsystems does help funnel money to contractors [with a small amount of "administrative overhead"] if you need something done and you have the funds to do it with. In which case, it's advised to have a proper plan, requirements document, and deliverables setup before going and proposing a course of action. That's where some opensource projects tend to fail: the requirements are too openended and thus the end-result cannot be achieved in a meaningful timeframe or in sufficiently manageable quanta (deliverables in this case). The deliverables and the scope of the work should be negotiated between all three parties: the 'customer', the 'contracting group', and the 'contractor'. Thanks, -Garrett