Hi all, thinking out loud but I do not think there will be a concensus, that said maybe we can all agree to not have it in consumer pom so it can be a custom namespace in build pom - which is still published and consummable by a funding plugin. Can make everyone happy?
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://x.com/rmannibucau> | .NET Blog <https://dotnetbirdie.github.io/> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.github.io/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/en-us/product/java-ee-8-high-performance-9781788473064> Javaccino founder (Java/.NET service - contact via linkedin) Le jeu. 28 août 2025 à 08:57, Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> a écrit : > A big +1 from my side: > > While there are many projects out there that have no issues with funding > and have a big community, there are some where only a handful (or less) are > doing all the work. > I would love to see something like a little funding report at the end of > the build. > > Mainly my work is consumed by users totally new to open-source. I think > most of them belong to the third and fourth type „never thought“ and > "didn’t know how“. > So, this would be great help for me. > > But taking my releases of PLC4X as an example … depending on which PLC4X > release you would refer to, you’d get 6 different places to go to … so this > might frustrate people (If they keep on using ancient versions) > > Chris > > > Von: Andy Law <[email protected]> > Datum: Donnerstag, 28. August 2025 um 08:43 > An: Maven Developers List <[email protected]> > Betreff: Re: support and funding metdata in poms and plugin > > ...And the third type - those who never thought about it. > ...And the ones who did, but didn’t know where to start to ask > > (But apart from that, what have the Romans ever done for us…) > > And if you don’t want to see it, then set the environment variable or > property to turn it off and carry on. This doesn’t sound like a Wikipedia > “Before we show you the thing that you were looking for” style interaction. > > Have you seen the npm implementation? > > Later, > > Andy > > From: Delany <[email protected]> > Date: Thursday, 28 August 2025 at 06:44 > To: Maven Developers List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: support and funding metdata in poms and plugin > > There are two types of people: those who are looking for a program to > sponsor and those who are not. > If I was the former, the last place on the planet I'd look for a worthy > recipient is at the bottom of my latest build output. > This isn't Wikipedia with its > philanthropic, save-the-world-through-education vibe - these are esoteric > software development side-projects. > I don't want promotional content showing up in my sacred build output. > Its just not the place for pathos. > > My 2 cents > > On Thu, 28 Aug 2025 at 03:37, Olivier Lamy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > Thanks for your reply. > > I wouldn’t really see this as spamming. It will be only two extra > > lines at the end of a Maven build, with an easy opt-out (env var or > > sys prop) for anyone who prefers not to see it. > > It seems essential to keep it independent of vendors (GitHub, > > Sonatype, etc.). A few lines (link to url which could be simply GH > > funding url) in the POM keep it simple and entirely under the > > project’s control, avoiding the hassle of new files, signatures, or > > repository manager checks. > > It feels like a lightweight way to surface funding or support options > > for open source projects. > > Since open source often relies on unpaid time and effort, having an > > easy mechanism to point to support opportunities could be a small but > > helpful step. > > > > On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 at 02:02, Bernd Eckenfels <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin Todorov wrote on 22. Aug 2025 13:14 (GMT +02:00): > > > > > > > I don't think this is spam. It's a way for developers to get an extra > > > > stream of income to work on the things they love. > > > > > > I would not put it into the POM, those are ethernal and immutable and > we > > try to mini ihr them. > > > > > > Maybe a separate sponsors.xml as a extra artifact is better - or we get > > an Organisation which already runs a Sponsoring program like GitHub to > > define an official mapping from coordinatea to projects. Or maybe > Sonatype > > since they would be able to correlate? > > > > > > If you want to keep it in the POM a rather neutral attribute like a > > @sponsor-search=true flag besides the project url would allow the > discovery > > (on that page). Then we would have to define that only the latest Version > > of each artifact is to be consulted. But not sure how possible a Schema > > change is? > > > > > > Gruß > > > Bernd > > > — > > > https://bernd.eckenfels.net/<https://bernd.eckenfels.net/> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, > with registration number SC005336. Is e buidheann carthannais a th’ ann an > Oilthigh Dhùn Èideann, clàraichte an Alba, àireamh clàraidh SC005336. >
