4 ms·

Why not offer a bounty to get this issue fixed? Are you otherwise paying any money to the bun team?

by throwaway2037 6mo ago

2colours 6mo ago
I think the question still deserves a proper answer.
- bouk 6mo ago
  No, open-source maintainers don't owe you anything if you don't pay for it
  - Chris2048 6mo ago
    I have similar problems with product I do pay for, and I still get told I have no say. FO/OSS distinction is a red herring. At some point it need to be made clear; it's not a legal obligation, but a reputational challenge.
  - throwaway2037 6mo ago
    I have said the same many times here on HN. This in/famous blog post really changed my view: "Open Source Maintainers Owe You Nothing": https://mikemcquaid.com/open-source-maintainers-owe-you-nothing/ https://mikemcquaid.com/open-source-maintainers-owe-you-noth...
- Mad_ad 6mo ago
  No it doesn't. No opensource dev need to answer anything, if you dont like it, fork it and do the work yourself.
  - philipallstar 6mo ago
    Maybe it can be better phrased as "I think this question doesn't deserve that answer"
- LadyCailin 6mo ago
  The answer is because YOU haven’t fixed it yet. Chop chop, we’re all waiting on you.
- pie_flavor 6mo ago
  Please observe a policy of extreme wisdom: https://github.com/Fody/Home/blob/master/pages/licensing-patron-faq.md#do-i-need-to-be-a-patron-to-raise-an-issue https://github.com/Fody/Home/blob/master/pages/licensing-pat...
  - gobdovan 6mo ago
    Are you being ironic or serious? I can see both pros (encourage people to see themselves as customers) and cons (less initial adoption) to the licensing, although I'd maybe leave bug issues open for everybody. What aspect do you think dominates?
    - pie_flavor 6mo ago
      Serious. And although 'seeing yourself as a customer' certainly makes things slightly better, I'm also referring just to the amount of cash that enters the coffers once it's no longer a tip jar per se. It is open source on the subject of copyright, but as was described in an article on here the other day, open-source doesn't mean community. By positioning the community aspect as something you have to buy into to enter, you end up (a) selling a product for cash without compromising open source and (b) ensuring everyone you deal with is serious. It's like the Red Hat model but workable at the lower end of software at the expense of lower upside.
  - throwaway2037 6mo ago
    I do know why your post is downvoted, and I disagree with it. Here is my upvote. I read the link that you shared. This is genius. To quote: > Community backed > Fody requires significant effort to maintain. As such it relies on financial support to ensure its long term viability. > It is expected that all developers using Fody become a Patron on OpenCollective. I can remember years ago reading some posts/writings from none other than Richard Stallman (yeah, that guy). He was talking about charging people for a copy of the source code to your open source project. At the time, I thought it was weird and did not make sense. This is basically the same thing but in 2026. After watching so much bullshit around open source projects (basically, assholes expecting free service for whining the loudest), I have come to the conclusion that "money talks" and helps to realign incentives that are warped by open source.
latexr 6mo ago
This is getting stupid. Now one can’t even make a reasonable polite question with praise without being asked if they pay. Bun raised millions of dollars and was acquired by a commercial entity which bragged in the same blog post of reaching $1B. They’re not a guy with an eyepatch and a tin can out on the street. Open-source developers should be compensated, but they don’t have to be. You can’t reasonably offer your work for free then complain someone isn’t paying you. If you want to be paid, charge for it. Signed: A long time open-source developer who has dedicated years of full-time work to useful projects without compensation or raising VC money or being acquired.
- jaapz 6mo ago
  Come on, whenever a project is discussed on hackernews, there is always one comment of "why are you working on X, when you should be fixing bug Y?!". We are all software engineers on here (or at least many of us are), we all know how project management and prioritisation works right? We can't work on everything all at once.
  - Chris2048 6mo ago
    given the alleged context, X being something "reported in 2023, still affecting us 3 years later", is this not a reasonable PM / priority decision to question?
  - latexr 6mo ago
    > Come on, whenever a project is discussed on hackernews, there is always one comment of "why are you working on X, when you should be fixing bug Y?!". That is not what the question is about, which you’ll see if you engage with it properly in good faith. There is a single question in the comment (indicated, as one does in English, by a question mark): > How do you feel about all the constant concerns being raised about the quality of the project lately? Everything else is context and opinion to explain the question.

Why not offer a bounty to get this issue fixed? Are you otherwise paying any money to the bun team?

2colours 6mo ago

I think the question still deserves a proper answer.

bouk 6mo ago
No, open-source maintainers don't owe you anything if you don't pay for it
- Chris2048 6mo ago
  I have similar problems with product I do pay for, and I still get told I have no say. FO/OSS distinction is a red herring. At some point it need to be made clear; it's not a legal obligation, but a reputational challenge.
- throwaway2037 6mo ago
  I have said the same many times here on HN. This in/famous blog post really changed my view: "Open Source Maintainers Owe You Nothing": https://mikemcquaid.com/open-source-maintainers-owe-you-nothing/ https://mikemcquaid.com/open-source-maintainers-owe-you-noth...
Mad_ad 6mo ago
No it doesn't. No opensource dev need to answer anything, if you dont like it, fork it and do the work yourself.
- philipallstar 6mo ago
  Maybe it can be better phrased as "I think this question doesn't deserve that answer"
LadyCailin 6mo ago
The answer is because YOU haven’t fixed it yet. Chop chop, we’re all waiting on you.
pie_flavor 6mo ago
Please observe a policy of extreme wisdom: https://github.com/Fody/Home/blob/master/pages/licensing-patron-faq.md#do-i-need-to-be-a-patron-to-raise-an-issue https://github.com/Fody/Home/blob/master/pages/licensing-pat...
- gobdovan 6mo ago
  Are you being ironic or serious? I can see both pros (encourage people to see themselves as customers) and cons (less initial adoption) to the licensing, although I'd maybe leave bug issues open for everybody. What aspect do you think dominates?
  - pie_flavor 6mo ago
    Serious. And although 'seeing yourself as a customer' certainly makes things slightly better, I'm also referring just to the amount of cash that enters the coffers once it's no longer a tip jar per se. It is open source on the subject of copyright, but as was described in an article on here the other day, open-source doesn't mean community. By positioning the community aspect as something you have to buy into to enter, you end up (a) selling a product for cash without compromising open source and (b) ensuring everyone you deal with is serious. It's like the Red Hat model but workable at the lower end of software at the expense of lower upside.
- throwaway2037 6mo ago
  I do know why your post is downvoted, and I disagree with it. Here is my upvote. I read the link that you shared. This is genius. To quote: > Community backed > Fody requires significant effort to maintain. As such it relies on financial support to ensure its long term viability. > It is expected that all developers using Fody become a Patron on OpenCollective. I can remember years ago reading some posts/writings from none other than Richard Stallman (yeah, that guy). He was talking about charging people for a copy of the source code to your open source project. At the time, I thought it was weird and did not make sense. This is basically the same thing but in 2026. After watching so much bullshit around open source projects (basically, assholes expecting free service for whining the loudest), I have come to the conclusion that "money talks" and helps to realign incentives that are warped by open source.

latexr 6mo ago

This is getting stupid. Now one can’t even make a reasonable polite question with praise without being asked if they pay. Bun raised millions of dollars and was acquired by a commercial entity which bragged in the same blog post of reaching $1B. They’re not a guy with an eyepatch and a tin can out on the street. Open-source developers should be compensated, but they don’t have to be. You can’t reasonably offer your work for free then complain someone isn’t paying you. If you want to be paid, charge for it. Signed: A long time open-source developer who has dedicated years of full-time work to useful projects without compensation or raising VC money or being acquired.

jaapz 6mo ago
Come on, whenever a project is discussed on hackernews, there is always one comment of "why are you working on X, when you should be fixing bug Y?!". We are all software engineers on here (or at least many of us are), we all know how project management and prioritisation works right? We can't work on everything all at once.
- Chris2048 6mo ago
  given the alleged context, X being something "reported in 2023, still affecting us 3 years later", is this not a reasonable PM / priority decision to question?
- latexr 6mo ago
  > Come on, whenever a project is discussed on hackernews, there is always one comment of "why are you working on X, when you should be fixing bug Y?!". That is not what the question is about, which you’ll see if you engage with it properly in good faith. There is a single question in the comment (indicated, as one does in English, by a question mark): > How do you feel about all the constant concerns being raised about the quality of the project lately? Everything else is context and opinion to explain the question.