bugs.kde.org -> bugzilla??

[Don Sanders]

Thanks Daniel, Marc, Stephan, for replying I really do want to know 
what opinions people have.

It's clear that the bug system maintainers don't want money to be 
involved with KDE development.

I guess this means if I want to move forward with the idea of 
donations associated with bugs I will have to set up another bug 
tracking system and another non profit organization.  I will not be 
doing that in the near future but I am prepared to do that in the 
long term.

I'll cover all the responses to my post in this single mail.

Regarding Stephan's points:
>
> Just to give my oppinion on this mater: if this discussion
> continues, I will disable the voting feature completly. Right now I
> consider turning it on as it highlightes more important bugs beside
> causing duplicates, but if this turns out to cause a money
> discussion, I will drop it

If there is a problem with discussing this on kde-core-devel then 
would it be possible to set up a kde-funding list?

I can't just drop the subject. KDE development is not just about 
having fun for me, it's more serious than that.

I care about the users and want to know what they want. I can't talk 
to them all individually so I need statistics. And these statistics 
have to be meaningful so I can use them to prioritize my time.

I care about the developers also. I don't like watching idealistic 
youngsters burn themselves out in the pursuit of idealistic dreams. 
I've seen too much of that and it's made me question my involvement 
with KDE, I'm determined to stop that happening to people I care 
about.

This donate to a bug system is the best way I can think of achieving 
these goals and I won't be giving it up easily.

I can respect the viewpoint that money is the root of all evil and 
that discussing it on development mailing lists will lead to no good. 
That's why I've thought long and hard to come up with a system that 
doesn't penalize developers that just want to have fun.


Regarding Daniel's points:
> Because then users will say "but that bug has already $100
> donations and these idiots still didn't implement it".

I don't regard that to be a legitimate complaint if you clearly inform 
users that contributions are donations.

> You might
> want to work on things that users need (or better: that they think
> they need), but I guess that most developers want to work on things
> that are fun for them.

It's true I'm concerned about satisfying user needs rather than just 
having fun.

I don't believe the majority of developers contribute just to have 
fun. I get more the impression that they contribute because it gives 
them hope for the future and adds meaning to their lives.

> And that's the basic problem: people will
> vote and 90% of the developers won't care. Then users will be
> disappointed, even more so when they actually donated money.

This is speculation. However if it turns out that developers aren't 
interested in the system then I won't have a problem with shutting it 
down.


Regarding Marc's points:

> I see the masses voting for client-side filtering of IMAP messages
> in KMail, although that's totally banana. If the amount reaches
> $1000, someone unrelated will step up, implement it for the money
> and go away. Wow. And we end up maintaining the sh*t - without
> payment.

Marc I fully agree this is a serious potential problem. This is why I 
suggest giving the money to a charity, it simply eliminates this 
risk.

Ultimately however if a substantial revenue stream is created then I 
am ok with some of it eventually being given to developers. But 
because of the concern you have mentioned I think the funds should 
first go to an organizing body like KDE e.V. that decides where funds 
should be allocated.

> I for one agree with Daniel's assesment. I want to work on the
> things I like, not on what users think they want. I want to
> implement things right, not fast. I want to implement things when
> they're ripe in my head, not when they're en vogue in the user
> community.

I'll extrapolate this to mean you would prefer to work on a project 
where others feel the same way as you. That is you don't want 
commercial interests to pervert the course of development.

To a certain extent we are at risk of this already. I believe it's 
certainly possible for a well funded entity to hijack development. I 
guess something like this happened with the internet standards bodies 
during the dot com boom, and it could happen to us.

In the long term I think financial independence is the best protection 
against such corruption.

> I am not against collecting money to further development, but I am
> against collecting money to shove developers into implementing
> features.

Agreed.

> Hey, why not consider ages of _bug_ reports, and assign from the
> pool of donated money to each bug report with a key based on
> severity and age?

I think this idea has some merit. I would prefer just to donate money 
to charity initially. If it turns out that sufficient funds could be 
raised to make it worth while discussing how these funds should be 
dispersed then I think I would prefer to get together and discuss 
that face to face.

Don.