Welcome to Geeklog Tuesday, October 17 2017 @ 04:00 am EDT


Status: offline

Dirk

Site Admin
Admin
Registered: 12/01/2002
Posts: 13073
Location:Stuttgart, Germany
Please use this thread to discuss the new Geeklog Bounties initiative.

To address the most common questions (this list will probably be updated in the course of the discussion):

  • This does not mean that from now on, features will only be implemented if there's a sponsor for them. This is meant as a way of reducing our backlog of open feature requests and give those a chance that probably won't get implemented otherwise.

  • At this time, we are not really looking for new ideas (see above). Once the initiative is well under way and we may even have found some additional sponsors, we're willing to take new feature requests into account. But as long as our resources are limited, please stick to the list of open feature requests.

Status: offline

LWC

Forum User
Full Member
Registered: 19/02/2004
Posts: 818
What about the suggested patches' list? It's a much smaller list and much easier to implement because people submit patches with semi or full solutions instead of just saying "please add x".

Status: offline

rv8

Forum User
Regular Poster
Registered: 10/10/2002
Posts: 105
Location:Ottawa, Canada
Could we have a way to let users vote with their wallets? I mean a way for users to pledge a contribution for a bounty againsta particular feature request.
Kevin Horton

Status: offline

Dirk

Site Admin
Admin
Registered: 12/01/2002
Posts: 13073
Location:Stuttgart, Germany
Quote by: rv8

Could we have a way to let users vote with their wallets? I mean a way for users to pledge a contribution for a bounty againsta particular feature request.


Sure - if anyone wants to sponsor a particular feature request (fully or in part), let us know. I tried to explain that on the bounties page - maybe it wasn't that clear.

bye, Dirk

Status: offline

Dirk

Site Admin
Admin
Registered: 12/01/2002
Posts: 13073
Location:Stuttgart, Germany
Quote by: LWC

What about the suggested patches' list?


Well, ideally patches are already implemented, so all we would need to do is integrate them. I'll have to look at the open ones again, but there's probably a reason why we haven't picked them up yet ...

bye, Dirk

Status: offline

rv8

Forum User
Regular Poster
Registered: 10/10/2002
Posts: 105
Location:Ottawa, Canada
Nope, you were clear enough. I just skimmed over that part. My fault. I've sent you a message with a pledge for my favourite missing feature.
Kevin Horton

Status: offline

LWC

Forum User
Full Member
Registered: 19/02/2004
Posts: 818
Well, ideally patches are already implemented.

But in reality the list gets bigger and bigger and many patches just lie there and I think it's a shame since they're so easier to add than general requests.

Status: offline

jmucchiello

Forum User
Full Member
Registered: 29/08/2005
Posts: 985
Over time patches aren't easy to just put into cvs. API changes between versions can mess up patches greatly. The changes between 1.4.0 and 1.4.1 were such that I would have called 1.4.1 a 1.5.0 release. It would be nice if there was a requirement for the PLG_ and COM_ functions to be frozen between minor version changes. My patch for readonly/writeonly topics for 1.4.0 looks nothing like the patch for 1.4.1 because several important COM_ functions had added parameters and my patch also adds parameters to those functions. So in 1.4.1 I just created "extended" versions of the functions to get around the issue. But a real solution is needed since the interface for COM_topicList would have 5 parameters with my change and having defaults on a function with that many parameters can be meaningless. Might be worth changing the interface to take an array called $options at that point. But that's not my call.

Status: offline

LWC

Forum User
Full Member
Registered: 19/02/2004
Posts: 818
I wanted to talk with Dirk about the money that changes hands. Since it (at least so far) was ignored in the story's comments, I thought I'd quote myself here:
If you want to increase the motivation for this, give us back an invoice so we could declare this as a business expense. All you have to do is open up a small business, which is usually free and just takes some paperwork. You can always pay $0 taxes for times when you have $0 earnings (although there's no reason for that thanks to the ongoing bounty sponsors).

Admittedly, you still won't be able to declare business expenses yourself (when you pay the "out source" programmers), because I doubt most programmers would agree to form a business themselves (although I wish they did). Still, even one proper direction (the "sponsors to you" direction) is better than nothing.

Besides, it would also make sure you stay out of trouble with your IRS now that you're going to get (or already do get) regular unofficial income.

You know what? Maybe you can form a nonprofit organization instead of a small business, and then you'd get all of the benefits those things get.

Well, just wanted to give you some food for thought.

Status: offline

Dirk

Site Admin
Admin
Registered: 12/01/2002
Posts: 13073
Location:Stuttgart, Germany
Quote by: LWC

If you want to increase the motivation for this, give us back an invoice so we could declare this as a business expense.


I can provide you with an invoice which, according to German law, I can write without running a business, as long as I don't exceed a certain amount of money per year. So that's not a problem on my end - not sure if that piece of paper (or PDF) would be accepted in other countries, though.

bye, Dirk

Status: offline

LWC

Forum User
Full Member
Registered: 19/02/2004
Posts: 818
This is a tricky one as here you're supposed to have a business and I'm not sure who to ask (the IRS' phone support can barely help themselves). Would you at least tell me the the exact law and clause that state this?

BTW, how much money per year are we talking about?

And is this how bounties shall work in general? Project requesters would always pay you and you'd always pay the programmers?

Status: offline

Dirk

Site Admin
Admin
Registered: 12/01/2002
Posts: 13073
Location:Stuttgart, Germany
Quote by: LWC

BTW, how much money per year are we talking about?

And is this how bounties shall work in general? Project requesters would always pay you and you'd always pay the programmers?


Check our bounties page - there are two sorts of sponsorship: Ongoing and per task.

Ongoing (like AOE Media did) means that someone gives us the money and we decide which task to sponsor with it. Per task (as Kevin Horton did) is a one-time dontation towards a specific feature.

I guess the latter could also be paid directly from the sponsor to the person(s) implementing it. But we'd like to protect us and the people working on a task from "disappearing acts". It would make us look bad and the person working on the task angry. That way, we also have more control over if and how we accept the code - given that we will have to maintain it from that point on, I think that's only fair.

bye, Dirk

Status: offline

LWC

Forum User
Full Member
Registered: 19/02/2004
Posts: 818
Yes, I meant the per task, of course. How will you give/take money? PayPal?

Would you at least tell me the the exact law and clause that state this?

BTW, how much money per year are we talking about?

?

loverboi

Anonymous
artistic
whats gong on with this stuff....bounties are dead? :banana:

Status: offline

Dirk

Site Admin
Admin
Registered: 12/01/2002
Posts: 13073
Location:Stuttgart, Germany
Quote by: loverboi

bounties are dead?


What makes you think that?

bye, Dirk

All times are EDT. The time is now 04:00 am.

  • Normal Topic
  • Sticky Topic
  • Locked Topic
  • New Post
  • Sticky Topic W/ New Post
  • Locked Topic W/ New Post
  •  View Anonymous Posts
  •  Able to post
  •  Filtered HTML Allowed
  •  Censored Content