Re: [HACKERS] Raising funds for PostgreSQL

Kyle Bateman wrote:

> The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> > A pledge is record/valid when, and only when, the pledge has been
> > received...
> >
>
> What can we do to assure a donor that his feature will actually get completed as a result
> of his donation?  It seems to me this will be most people's hesitation (mine, at least)
> is sending money in without any kind of mechanism to control how it is spent.

    Maybe  we  have  to  make pools per feature. Requires IMHO to
    move features, where donations  can  be  thrown  on,  onto  a
    separate  DONOTODO  list.  Items  there  should have a clear,
    detailed  specification,  what  the  feature   finally   will
    implement   and  expected  implementation  time,  assuming  a
    developer can work at least X hours per week on it.

    Each of these DONOTODO items has  it's  own  account,  and  a
    donator  can send in cash for specific items. As soon, as the
    account balance raised high enough, someone will claim to  do
    it  -  sure. At this point, the item is locked and a deadline
    for finishing, depending on the estimated  efford  (from  the
    detailed feature spec) is set.

    Up  to the point, where an item get's locked, the donator can
    transfer any amount between item accounts and (of course) get
    back  his money.  After that point, only additional donations
    can be placed on the item to increase the efford to finish it
    in time.

    At  deadline  overruns,  donators can decide again what to do
    with their money. So the developers have some pressure in the
    neck to complete the items in time.

    In  the  backside,  we must coordinate if multiple developers
    need each other to do one item together. They have to  decide
    a  split  ratio  of  the  account  balance.  Should IMHO be a
    floating process and depending on  the  developers  involved,
    could be open until the end.

    Well,  there  must  be  a  steering commitee, controlling the
    DONOTODO items and the cash flow - PostgreSQL Inc.  would  be
    my first guess.


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#========================================= wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) #