groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From MG <mg...@arscreat.com>
Subject Re: @Groovy Champions: Groovy Development Funding ?
Date Fri, 16 Feb 2018 18:33:22 GMT
Positively surprised by the responses so far :-)

I agree that one or more concrete goals would be easiest to entice 
people to fund some development. Batching together multiple goals might 
have its merits, since it would allow goals with less support to also be 
funded over time.

I hve to date only funded projects (on Kickstarter 
(https://www.kickstarter.com) and Indiegogo (https://www.indiegogo.com)).
Does anyone have any experience with funding software projects on these 
or better suited platforms ?
Having the platform take less of the money would be an obvious goal, 
which could be achievd by creating a Paypal address which people can 
donate money to - but that has never the same pull as multiple people 
trying to achieve a common funding goal within a set time period...

How to reach people is another important question: This mailing ist has 
about 450 subscribers, which, given that Groovy is the #2 JVM language, 
is a small number. Question is how many could be reached through other 
channels (Twitter ? Slack ? Classic media ?...) ?

With regards to "who should get how much": Right now I would have a good 
feeling that the small number of main contributors will find a way to 
agree to a key between them, especially considering that it seems it is 
mostly one or maybe two person(s) working on a particular topic. I woud 
feel that at least some money should always go into supporting the less 
sexy Groovy tasks, such as continuing to stay compatible with Java, 
fixing bugs etc.

Cheers,
mg


On 16.02.2018 11:49, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>
>
> Am 16.02.2018 um 03:27 schrieb Paul King:
>> Actually, Apache also accept donations but I think the standard 
>> policy is that it isn't then directed back to a specific project.
>
> I actually am of the impression that this is the only policy... might 
> be wrong here.
>
>> I think in general we would be in favor of doing this so long as it 
>> was done well - and most of us wonder whether we have the time to 
>> market/advertise it well. I also suspect that having a well-defined 
>> goal (like what JUnit 5 did to some degree) greatly helps to attract 
>> some one-off investment interest.
>
> +1
>
> bye Jochen
>


Mime
View raw message