3 ms·
IMO the issue is as soon as it's paid, there needs to be a "Software Engineering Manager" of some sort or another in the middle of the payers and the workers. T
by jakear 4y ago
IMO the issue is as soon as it's paid, there needs to be a "Software Engineering Manager" of some sort or another in the middle of the payers and the workers. That's a very difficult job to hard-code.
Having spent some time maintaining large OSS projects as a first party engineer, these are the options I see:
- pay a fixed donation per month, a la patreon/etc. I would never do this. If I'm buying software for a company I want a real support contract, not a "I'll really try to respond to your issues with higher priority!". If I'm using software in a personal project, I want the monthly burn to be as close to 0 as possible. Also, who takes that money? What do third party PR submitters get? What do people who submit excellent issue reports with crash dumps and full debug traces get? What do first party PR reviewers get? Third party? etc. etc.
- stake money on the closing of a given issue/PR. This is better, but comes with a whole can of worms. The obvious failure mode is a third party contributor submitting a PR, the maintainer saying "eh.... I don't really agree with the way you've done this", then building it themselves. Next step on that train is a fight between the third party and the maintainer about how much influence one's code had on the other. Even if that doesn't happen, the maintainer is almost guaranteed to request changes of some sort, who decides how much the maintainer gets for their work reviewing versus the third party for their work contributing?
Not to mention the dirty little secret behind many third party contributions: if you are new to the repo, the frameworks, oss in general, etc., it is highly likely that the maintainer's work in holding your hand through contributing to the repo will far outweigh the work they'd need to put in to make the change themselves. But few would agree to paying the maintainer to accept their PR, or likely even the maintainer getting more money than them for their own PR.