3 ms·

Isn't the answer for this to fork the project and then put the bounty on the fork? If the work to earn the bounty is valuable then the forked project can ask t

• jordigh 12y ago
  Depends what you mean with "fork". The usage used to mean a big and ominous circumstance, like Emacs vs XEmacs or gcc vs egcs. Nowadays people use it to mean any deviation from a project, no matter how tiny, or even simply a server-side git clone, as popularised by github. Nobody is obligated to accept any patches, no matter their provenance, no matter if they were paid for. My two parties above in a mutually beneficial agreement could decide to keep the patches between themselves if upstream rejects them. I suppose that could be called a fork. I don't think every such occasion should warrant a new name like under the traditional definition of "fork", though.
  • dllthomas 12y ago
    'I don't think every such occasion should warrant a new name like under the traditional definition of "fork", though.' Well, I certainly think it warrants clarity as to who is responsible for issues. That needn't take the form of "a new name" though, I agree.