Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> writes: ... > With respect to Debian-packaged software, if we address both issues, > the benefit is that more resources can be directed toward Free > Software development. That is an assumption that I happen to think is completely unfounded. IBM tested various ways of incentivising coders decades ago -- almost all of them were disastrously counter-productive. We tried DuncTank -- I'd contend that the net amount of productive work done was reduced by that initiative, and some very active contributors were demotivated to the point that they went away and didn't come back. It is bound to direct money to highly visible projects, regardless of the effort required to package them, while people working on vital but largely invisible infrastructure will get nothing much -- how good is that going to be for the project? (when the Morlocks see the Eloi having all the fun, I fear that they may start to get hungry ;-) ). How do we determine a fair split between a couple of developers, one living in a penthouse in New York, and another living in a shanty town on a dollar a day. I presume we'd be open about what people were being paid? How about if we end up publishing that we've given someone what amounts to a fortune in their locale? I'm not against people being paid for Free Software work -- that's what pays my mortgage after all, and much of my income for the last 20 years has been at least peripherally related to Debian. I just don't like the idea of Debian being the conduit for the money. I think it's even problematic for Debian to act as the advertiser. If a developer and their customer negotiate a deal, nobody but the developer need worry if they think it's a fair deal, and nobody but the developer's reputation is at risk. Otherwise we'll start to see complaints like: "I gave Debian $1000 and they don't even acknowledge my bug reports" In conclusion, I think this is a very dangerous idea, and that it would cause nothing but trouble. The main underlying assumption is wrong. People work on Debian as amateurs, in the best sense of the word (i.e. motivated by the love of it, not for financial gain). An influx of mercenaries would not be a net gain. If it were needed or useful, Debian would not exist. If it was a really good idea then we'd all be using something like Mandrake instead. Cheers, Phil. P.S. in answer to: > What do you think about the counter-argument to that statement posed by Martin Owens? > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2013/06/msg00031.html The idea that it's currently impossible to fund Free Software is nonsense. See IBM, HP, Canonical, my customers, anyone that's ever said to a DD (or anyone else for that matter): "I'll buy you a beer if you help me package this..." Where payments to work on Debian make sense, removing friction is a good thing for all involved, but that should all be done (far) outside Debian. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] http://www.hands.com/ |-| HANDS.COM Ltd. http://www.uk.debian.org/ |(| 10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London E18 1NE ENGLAND
Attachment:
pgpyrKnb0q6hm.pgp
Description: PGP signature