4 ms·
In my mind this is a problem that must be solved at a packagemanager level, where its both possible to dynamically allocate consumer money based on utilisation/
by Ninn 7y ago
In my mind this is a problem that must be solved at a packagemanager level, where its both possible to dynamically allocate consumer money based on utilisation/download distrubutions, and other allocation factors, such as more sentimental ones.
In addition i think that just installing a module and then starting to recieve funding is a bad carrot, as i can already feel the drama of people who will refuse to give up abandoned packages and namespaces, just to claim their funding. If you had it a bit more centralised you could atleast punish that kind of behaviour and make people responsible if they want to participate in the ecosystem of payouts.
- rossmohax 7y agoJust a thought experiment, lets say funding was solved, but in a way that package's funding is split between owner and all dependencies. Then there would be economic incentive to implement trivial bits yourself and only dependencies bringing true value would be pulled in. This in turn would weed out all the rubbish packages as there would be no reason to create them in the first place, since no one would be installing them. It can benefit whole ecosystem where rules of Darwin's evolution come into play.