Re: Bounties

[David Kastrup]

Tim McNamara <address@hidden> writes:

> As a user, I would tend to prefer to just kick money into a general
> fund and let someone figure out how it gets utilized for exactly the
> reason that was mentioned: I might want feature X, but groundwork U V
> and W- about which I know nothing- would have to precede the addition
> of feature X.  Bounties could end up complicating the logical
> development of Lilypond if they end up causing piecemeal development.

There certainly is a case for bounties as well.  Bounties _tend_ to be
raller on the smallish side compared with actual development efforts, so
they can be effective for what amounts to "picking ripe fruit": paying
someone for a job possibly requiring skills and/or knowledge but not
significant work once you _have_ the skills and knowledge.

It can mean that the person placing the bounty finds it more effective
to pay the bounty rather than bother with acquiring the necessary
skills.  It can also mean that the documentation of LilyPond is in a
state where acquiring the necessary skills is unnecessarily hard.

The second state is not easily tackled with bounties: why would you want
to promise a reward for doing the work yourself in the end?

It is a middle ground: individuals may commission work on the one hand,
and they may be willing to pay for individual training on the other, but
commissioning teaching materials is more likely done by communities of
some sort and, after all, it benefits a community.

-- 
David Kastrup