[Foundation-l] Re: Rewards for developers
Timwi
timwi at gmx.net
Sun Jul 25 01:51:19 UTC 2004
Dori wrote:
> It seems too convoluted and prone to conflicts to work effectively
> IMO. Donors are unlikely to identify all the features/bugs needing
> work.
Aw, come on now. That's not really a problem. We can certainly give
Jimbo and/or the Board of Trustees the additional power to assign up to
25% of unassigned donated money to development task.
The point is just anyone who personally thinks a particular feature or
bug is really overdue, should be able to directly encourage developers
by saying "I offer you $xyz for this". The more important a bug or
feature is to the community, the greater the amount of money will be.
> Likewise, we're unlikely to reach an agreement to the
> percentages.
I think you didn't understand this part. There is no agreement or
consensus required. Everyone specifies percentages of their own (in some
sort of designated user interface; they're kept secret). At the end of
the month, they are averaged out.
Example:
* I say: Alice has done 5% of feature X, Bob has done 10%, Charlie has
done 85%.
* You say: Alice has done 15% of feature X, Bob has done 15%, Charlie
has done 70%.
* Jimbo says: Alice has done 10% of feature X, Bob has done 26%, Charlie
has done 64%.
Then the end-result will be: Alice - 10%, Bob - 17%, Charlie - 73%.
Of course, the averaging could optionally be weighted by the amount of
money the voters received in the previous month.
> It might also lead to races between developers who start
> stepping on each other's work in order to get more money.
I don't think that will be a problem. Such blatantly un-co-operative
people can easily be penalised with very low percentages. People will
know they will get more money if they use their common sense to behave
within proper forms of etiquette.
Timwi
More information about the wikimedia-l
mailing list