3 ms·
There's Bountysource. Dunno if that's what you had in mind, but it seems like a similar principle. People put "bounties" on features in open source projects. So
by indigochill 7y ago
There's Bountysource. Dunno if that's what you had in mind, but it seems like a similar principle. People put "bounties" on features in open source projects. Someone closes a PR for that feature, they get the bounty. Someone wants to encourage work on a feature, they contribute to the feature's bounty.
In my view this is a natural next step for open source as it closes the loop on users who don't contribute code but do use the software. Now they can contribute financially, in theory fueling more code contributors (in practice, most bounties I've seen are not worth the work, but I've only had my eye on one obscure little open source game, so this may not be representative).
I think Kickstarter is not great for this model simply because it has a fixed end date for fundraising and there is less of a direct tie to specific features in a particular codebase.
- hbadgery 7y agoWe agree that a KickStarter style of funding is the best way to succesfully fund a project as it has many benefits. For example, funding companies mitigate risk by sharing the burden of cost. Check out our early Initiatives page and you'll find two early projects we are currently working with to get funding. Thanks for your awesome comment!