Donations in kde bug tracking system

[daniel]

allow me to further explain my points

>> i personally don't like the idea of money mixing with OpenSource
concepts.

linux is an free-software project, but numerous companies, namely the ones
you mentioned have been distributing it with closed-source software at the
base of the system.  most notable of these programs is suse's yast and yast2
which impliment closed source software to configure/update your system.
caldera also hase a questionable reputation when it comes to the use of
non-free software in conjuntion with linux.

sony has recently released linux for the ps2 and has conveniently found ways
around the gpl that don't _technically_ violate the gpl.  but in the words
of one user: "it does some pretty shitty things" to it.
www.execpc.com/~halkun/PS2/

the fact is that free software is _not_ a capitalist concept, it is in fact
the complete opposite.  work is done by users to make a good product, not to
get paid.  it's what's driven projects like apache and the kernel itself --
two things that suse and caldera would be nothing without.


>> money has the long-standing tratition of tainting things with greed and
>> impeding progress/innovation.

> If anything, I can argue the opposite. Companies are
> usually forced to progress/innovate to be able to survive.
> If they don't move, they are left out of market.

one word: micros~1.

> Please explain why you think money can hurt progress/innovation in KDE.

i more or less stated this above, but money hurts an OpenSource project by
corrupting the ideals behind the project.  sure, i'd love to give some cash
to the guys who build this gui.  gods know they deserve a hell of a lot more
financial aid than they're getting, but i'd rather do that in an informal
venue like a launch party or by offering some work of my own in return.
setting up a system which allows the donation of cash to individual projects
just leaves things wide open for corruption.

hypothetical example:

company A wants some project to be developed.  so they not only start it,
but then contribute LOTS of money to it.  developers flock to the project,
drawn to it by the lure of the fat cheque and suddenly, company A now has a
new shiny plugin for their closed-source software that will now dominate the
linux platform.  additional money can be contributed to projects that serve
no other purpose save keeping talented programmers away from their
competition's projects etc. etc.

when you enter money into the equasion, corruption inevitably follows.
corporations and rich individuals are then given a means to shape, direct,
and control the outcome of a project that was originally founded by a
public.


> They would still be free to work on whatever they see fit, I am not
> suggesting any restriction at all. And nobody would push nobody.
> Rather than a "push" it would be an incentive. And there is nothing
> wrong on giving incentives to developers, after all if someone is
> willing paying for fixing a bug, then the bug is hurting.


not to be mean, but this isn't a very well informed opinion.  people are
greedy.  developers and blue-blooded bourgeouis alike.  at present, the
Free-software culture is out of the reach of the money-driven world because
it's main engine, the software itself remains free of control from people
who would push to own a piece of it.


all of the above said, i would like to suggest that we, as a community try
to interact on more personal level in the form of launch parties and the
like.  it would give the large number of us, the users the chance to meet
the developers and pay proper respects.  money can always be involved at
that level, the community saying 'thank you' in the form of gifts etc. to
the leaders of said community.  but a system designed to pay developers to
work on certain projects is crossing the line.


...i guess that makes 4 cents.
am i the only one with this point of view?

_________________________________
daniel a. g. quinn
starving programmer

you cannot harm one who has dreamed a dream like mine.
 - ojibwe prayer




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: [kde] Donations in kde bug tracking system


I understand you are against it, but I fail to see your points.

> i personally don't like the idea of money mixing with OpenSource concepts.

It is a little late for this. IBM, Mandrake, Suse, HP, etc... you name it.
They are all in for the money and they do sell boxed copies of KDE ( with
linux also :) ). Guess what, that has turned out to be a very good thing for
KDE. The mix has actually been very benefitial for a lot of open source
projects.

Consider the recent offer of $200k to make linux run on the xbox. That can
only help linux get more people working on that.

> money has the long-standing tratition of tainting things with greed and
> impeding progress/innovation.

If anything, I can argue the opposite. Companies are usually forced to
progress/innovate to be able to survive. If they don't move, they are left
out of market. Companies such as the ones I mentioned earlier are constantly
putting new features and fixing bugs in linux distributions, and helping kde
in the process, to avoid being left out of the game.
Now, money does not drive a tipical kde developer, but since most of them
are
not currently receiving anything, it can't hurt :)
Please explain why you think money can hurt progress/innovation in KDE.

> and the foundation of free software is exactly
> that: free.

It would still be as free as it is today. Nobody ever said anything about
charging for bugs. I am talking about voluntary donations, or incentives
from
the users to the developers. It would be a form of gratitude from whoever
wants to thank with money.

> developers have to be free to work on whichever project they
> think deserves their attention, not pushed into a project by the tasty
> reward offered.

They would still be free to work on whatever they see fit, I am not
suggesting
any restriction at all. And nobody would push nobody. Rather than a "push"
it
would be an incentive. And there is nothing wrong on giving incentives to
developers, after all if someone is willing paying for fixing a bug, then
the
bug is hurting.

It can be true that sometimes a developer might choose one bug over a more
important one because of the reward. Here, I can see a point. However, it
will also be true that developers will work more on kde just because they
can
get something out of it (this is a good thing). Also, there are some bugs or
features that nobody want to fix/implement. Some of these are badly wanted
by
many users. Money would be a great way to give incentives to developers to
work on them.

> if financial rewards are suddenly available, you invite all the evils that
> come with the concept of monetary exchange for services rendered,

what "evils" are you talking about? I am not talking about suddenly putting
an
EULA on KDE, it is just donations.

> rather
> than operating the OpenSource movement on something more /open/ to
> innovation: the need for free, stable and powerful software.
How are donations less /open/?




- Developers would win with this. They would receive something for their
work.
- Users would win with this. The most badly wanted bugs will supposedly get
fixed sooner.
- KDE would win with this. Developers will spend more time fixing bugs,
because they have an extra incentive.

I do not see what is wrong with this picture :)
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.


___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management:  http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.