3 ms·
Honestly, absolutely not, and I think money would be harmful. Lots of software doesn't need a lot of work. It can be simple. When people get paid to solve probl
by staticassertion 5y ago
Honestly, absolutely not, and I think money would be harmful. Lots of software doesn't need a lot of work. It can be simple. When people get paid to solve problems there's an incentive to add more code, to add new domains, etc.
Use the standard java logger and move on, it's that easy.
- tekknik 5y agoWhere’s my incentive to work the weekend supporting a project after a long week of supporting my production code? If we want solid and secure OSS, we gotta pay someone!
- staticassertion 5y agoPresumably it's the same incentive that pushed you to write it the first time. If you don't want to work on it anymore that's OK too. Open source libraries are generally not held to particularly stringent requirements by the vast majority of people - perhaps accepting an obvious patch in a critical situation, at most. You obviously can pay people. They're called employees. The thing about employees is that your money translates to business value, which is much broader than a single library. This means that when a single library is done the developer doesn't have to think "ok but what's next for this library" and start adding more code. They can stop and move on to other tasks. Paying for a single library is nice. I support multiple open source developers because I appreciate their work. I recommend everyone does so. I don't at all believe it's going to help security though.