3 ms·
A logical next step would be to add bounty on specific bugs or features requests. If a company is relying on open source, and has no capability to fix a criti
by seren 7y ago
A logical next step would be to add bounty on specific bugs or features requests.
If a company is relying on open source, and has no
capability to fix a critical bug (which is a bad strategy but it certainly happens), it would probably be ready to pay a hefty sum so that the maintainer, or anyone involved in the project, will have at least a look at it.
Today, unless you can contact directly the maintainer and hope he or she has some spare time, I don't know how you can solve that kind of issue.
However, I am not sure who will decide a bug is fixed or a feature properly implemented.
- blauditore 7y agoOne not-so-bad solution could be similar to what StackOverflow does: The issuer of the bounty may decide who gets it. But even if they don't issue it to anyone, they don't receive their sum back. There there currency is points, but if it's real money, any unreleased bounties could go to some kind of general community pot for that project or whole Github after a while.
- return1 7y agoi think worklist.net has created a bidding platform that works that way. it's not popular, but something like that on github be pretty popular imho.
- seanabrahams 7y agoThis 1000x. I spoke to a designer at GitHub specifically about this a few years ago. Their initial concern was over-complicating the UI/UX. There's no doubt they've discussed this internally and I'm very curious what the hold up is.
- ShamelessC 7y agoSeems like it would give people the wrong idea.