3 ms·
If the goal however is to get companies to contribute more then the simultaneous applauding/shaming of a public donations registry is likely to encourage some c
by hoodoof 9y ago
If the goal however is to get companies to contribute more then the simultaneous applauding/shaming of a public donations registry is likely to encourage some companies to contribute because they like to be seen as good corporate citizens and not poor corporate citizens.
I can imagine for some companies it would be a matter of corporate pride to advertise their "projects financially supported" page, perhaps even as part of their recruiting effort to advertise how developer-centric they are.
github is the logical home for this, and indeed it is in the interests of github to do it - open source projects are far more likely to want to host on github if it has a public donations registry that, due to its public nature, actually works.
- watwut 9y agoIs it really good idea to give github defacto monopoly power? This would make it much harder for github competitor to arise and business competition is a good thing. Especially since as politics and culture tend to be more and more polarized, you don't want one company with that much power.
- hoodoof 9y agoOn the other hand, imagine if it really worked and money poured in to support open source projects - it would be transformative for the lives of many open source developers.
- watwut 9y agoGithub did populist political decisions in the past. They will move from "united meritocracy of Github" to full sjw and back in blink of eye. They do a lot of good for open source, but I would not trust them not to close project due to political reasons - especially under pressure. They are not the pick of a company I would do for project that aims to "shame" companies/individuals when they misbehave.