PDA

View Full Version : Would you pay...



cguy
April 16th, 2010, 11:08 PM
... to see a bug fixed or a new feature implemented?

The resolution of the bug/wish wouldn't be constrained by money, of course, and you could contribute with whatever amount you'd desire. (even cents)

For example, let's say that Bugzilla supported the "sponsorship" of bugs/feature requests.



I would.

Phrea
April 16th, 2010, 11:15 PM
No.

tica vun
April 16th, 2010, 11:18 PM
I'd probably put a few bounty if I encountered anything particularly annoying.

cguy
April 16th, 2010, 11:20 PM
I'd probably put a few bounty if I encountered anything particularly annoying.
Exactly what was on my mind.

JDShu
April 16th, 2010, 11:38 PM
This is a more complex issue than it at first seems. The thing is that people prefer to do things for free than to do things for a low amount of money. You might volunteer time at a charity, but if the charity wants to pay you minimum wage, then you are likely to help out less. In other words, people feel good that they're helping people out. Once you put a value on fixing a bug, then people are in pure market mode and will only fix the bug if they feel the amount of money in the bounty is worth it. In addition, once people get used to getting paid bounties, they may no longer like to volunteer time for free. Hence, putting bounties could hinder open source development more than help.

(General idea taken from behavioral economist Dan Ariely)

murderslastcrow
April 16th, 2010, 11:52 PM
I would like to support developers and projects I like, which I already do, and if I didn't know how to program I guess I could throw some money at some freelance developer to make a feature for me. I think we should give support to the projects we really love, especially if they need a little help to stay on their feet.

But I think bugs should be fixed out of a responsibility, not financial obligation.

cariboo
April 16th, 2010, 11:56 PM
In most cases the devs that work on the kernel and other major parts of the distribution are already paid.

Lightstar
April 17th, 2010, 12:36 PM
I don't like that kind of question

EarthMind
April 17th, 2010, 01:43 PM
If really necessary I would. If it was possible I'd already have done that for a few Netbeans features, because the PHP development team is so slow...

3rdalbum
April 17th, 2010, 02:28 PM
I would do it. I see the economist's side, but sometimes paying for a feature will make the developer put in extra work.

I've donated to Free Software projects (KDE, Gnome, Openshot) and I'd love it if someone donated to mine :-)

Khakilang
April 17th, 2010, 03:08 PM
I you pay for bug fix than all the apps will have bugs to make money for them.

sdowney717
April 17th, 2010, 03:20 PM
I you pay for bug fix than all the apps will have bugs to make money for them.

how about 2 versions of the software,
one free version with bugs.
one paid version without bugs.
:lolflag:

( I think they have more pride in their work than that)

Phrea
April 17th, 2010, 11:49 PM
... to see a bug fixed or a new feature implemented?

The resolution of the bug/wish wouldn't be constrained by money, of course, and you could contribute with whatever amount you'd desire. (even cents)

For example, let's say that Bugzilla supported the "sponsorship" of bugs/feature requests.



I would.
Let me clarify my abrupt answer:
It goes against every grain FOSS stands for.

NO I would never pay for bug fixes/features posted out in the open.
BUT, I would gladly pay a person who can fix a problem IRL I can't fix it myself.

Jon Monreal
April 18th, 2010, 12:39 AM
I don't think this is a viable thing for a distribution to try.

The existing systems of organizations and companies dedicated to assigning priorities for bugs and features as they see fit (whether through control of a single person, a board or a community) already democratically selects out what is important (after all, even if a distribution is under the control of a single person or a board if people don't like it they will stop using it and there will be no distribution).

Allowing payments to be accepted toward individual bugs and features could result in an imbalance in the work done depending on how much even an individual user wants a feature. Devs may also flock to bugs that have money on them, and by the time they are done, all of that money becomes almost nothing when divided among a large group of people. Then there are the caveats of associating a monetary value to said work that have already been pointed out above.

So, no, I would not pay into such a system.

Phrea
April 18th, 2010, 12:53 AM
Welcome to absolute freedom. :)
I can't be bothered to search the thread, but it must have been said before: Linux is not free as in free of cost, it's free as in freedom.

VeeDubb
April 18th, 2010, 12:59 AM
Allowing payments to be accepted toward individual bugs and features could result in an imbalance in the work done depending on how much even an individual user wants a feature.


Agreed.

I think there are better ways to get the same thing done anyway. Let's assume that the thought process behind the OP's idea is something like this:

I can't ever seem to get XYZ to work.
It seems like the devs are never focused on the problem I care about.
I believe that I am a typical user.
I must conclude that the devs don't care about the typical user because they do not always focus on things that I, a typical user, care about.
I'd be happy to pay my little share to have XYZ improved.
I must conclude that lot's of other people feel the same way, because I am a typical user.
Having everybody who wants one thing or another worked on pay a little money to prod the devs to work on it, will work very well because all typical users want the same things, and the devs just don't get it.

As any critical thinker can see, there is some badly flawed logic in that train of thought, but it's probably pretty close to the real thought behind this.

Here's the problems with it.

1. Everybody wants different things worked on. It might create a brief uptick in donations, but since resources would just be spread as thin as they are now, nothing would get fixed any faster, and people would just get angry.
2. It creates an unhealthy sense of entitlement. "I donated $25.00 to have XYZ fixed. Why is it still not working?"
3. There's not such thing as a typical user.
4. And this is the big one; There are already better ways in place to do this.

First of all, support ubuntu. Can't afford to make a donation? No problem. Next time you want to buy a new sweatshirt, buy an Ubuntu sweatshirt. Next time you want to buy some music online, use the UbuntuOne music store. The more that people contribute financially, the more resources there are to work with.

Second of all, contribute your time and knowledge. You do NOT need a degree in computer sciences to help the project along. You don't even need to know what you're doing for the most part. When you have a bug, file a bloody bug report. Add as much detail as your knowledge allows you to add. Even if you can't add anything, simply adding your name to an existing bug report tells the devs how widespread a problem really is. They all want Ubuntu to be the best, so when they see bugs that affect huge numbers of people, they work on them.

It's as simple as that. Contribute financially, even if it just means buying an I <3 Ubuntu bumper sticker once a year, and contribute technically, even if it's just filing a bug report.

That is how Ubuntu is improved.

Jon Monreal
April 18th, 2010, 01:31 AM
First of all, support ubuntu. Can't afford to make a donation? No problem. Next time you want to buy a new sweatshirt, buy an Ubuntu sweatshirt. Next time you want to buy some music online, use the UbuntuOne music store. The more that people contribute financially, the more resources there are to work with.

Second of all, contribute your time and knowledge. You do NOT need a degree in computer sciences to help the project along. You don't even need to know what you're doing for the most part. When you have a bug, file a bloody bug report. Add as much detail as your knowledge allows you to add. Even if you can't add anything, simply adding your name to an existing bug report tells the devs how widespread a problem really is. They all want Ubuntu to be the best, so when they see bugs that affect huge numbers of people, they work on them.

It's as simple as that. Contribute financially, even if it just means buying an I <3 Ubuntu bumper sticker once a year, and contribute technically, even if it's just filing a bug report.

That is how Ubuntu is improved.

That's what people really overlook; it's really not difficult to support a project like this. I think people need a healthy dose of even if they didn't have to pay for it,


Linux is not free as in free of cost, it's free as in freedom.

*ding ding ding* somebody has to pay to develop Ubuntu, and somebody has to offer all of the users community support.

If you use Ubuntu and you think it's a good idea, cast your vote for it not just by using it but also by supporting its development and the community in general.

PurposeOfReason
April 18th, 2010, 07:05 AM
For some things it'd be great. Say if we made a pot for foobar2000 to come to linux; I could see that getting quite large.

Doctor Mike
April 18th, 2010, 05:25 PM
Small rewards usually result in the largest increase in motivation. As the size of the reward increases the motivation toward a goal drops.

People start to question themselves; am I doing it for the money or because I should...

Random rewards are even better; employee of the month etc... here's a day pass for...

Beans almost work the same way...

cguy
April 18th, 2010, 05:41 PM
Let's assume that the thought process behind the OP's idea is something like this:
[I]
I can't ever seem to get XYZ to work.
It seems like the devs are never focused on the problem I care about.
I believe that I am a typical user.
I must conclude that the devs don't care about the typical user because they do not always focus on things that I, a typical user, care about.
I'd be happy to pay my little share to have XYZ improved.
I must conclude that lot's of other people feel the same way, because I am a typical user.
it's not :)

Jon Monreal
April 18th, 2010, 05:51 PM
it's not :)

I am interested in the counterargument. What do you think would happen, and what the real advantages of such a system would be?

Groucho Marxist
April 18th, 2010, 06:02 PM
I'd probably put a few bounty if I encountered anything particularly annoying.

Bounty hunters; we don't need their scum.

swoll1980
April 18th, 2010, 06:15 PM
You can hire someone to fix a bug. It will cost more than a few cents though.