On Tuesday 17 July 2007 11:00, Arno Lehmann wrote: > Hi, > > 17.07.2007 10:35,, Kern Sibbald wrote:: > > On Tuesday 17 July 2007 00:18, Maria McKinley wrote: > ... > >> I was just looking around on the website to figure out how to make a > >> donation, > > > > Thank you very much :-) > > > ... > > Donations have been possible for some time (a year or two), but they > > are no longer possible. Thank you to those who have already donated. > > > > I pulled down the donations page a few weeks ago when a user complained that > > the Bacula expenses were not transparent and he was reluctant to fund > > projects because of the possibility that the code would never be completed. > > Groan... Kern, I think that's listening to the peanut gallery :-)
Groan -- absolutely correct. :-( > > Really, in that case I would have hinted that if the user wants to buy > certain features he should approach the developers. If he doesn't want > to donate because Bacula isn't what he looks for - fine. If Bacula > offers what he needs, even better, but then he could donate, too. See below ... > > The argument that the code would probable never be complete is, excuse > me, nonsense. I know no big software project that claims that its code > is complete in the sense that it will not be necessary to further > develop it. My wording was probably not very clear. This user was saying he did not want to donate for a particular coding project (feature) because he had no assurance that that particular project would be completed and he did not know how much it really cost or how the money was used -- i.e. he has no confidence in the integrity of the developers. If that is how users feel, even a tiny minority, then I prefer to let them contract with a company if they want to fund a particular feature. Once a company is formed, I expect that the nature of things are that there will be far fewer contributions of code -- that is how human nature seems to work (according to everything I have read on the subject). So I am counting on the company and myself to pickup where the project leaves off. > Most software packages - Windows, FreeBSD, Openoffice, > samba and also Bacula for example - are continuously improved and > enhanced, but I don't think anyone could reasonably state these are > not complete. They all are usable for their respective purposes. I agree. However, that was not the issue I was refering too. > > > Once a corporation is in place, perhaps I will re-install the donations > > page -- who knows. > > Which would start lots of arguments if you can reasonably donate if > you can also buy, and if you can make the use of commercial fees vs. > donations transparent, etc. I sense... interesting discussions. A lot of people will still be getting the software and the binaries for free. They may or may not want to donate -- the Bacula project and the Bacula company are quite separate. I had hoped that donations might be important, but I was wrong. After the company is created, I expect they will be even fewer and farther between. If all goes well with the company, hopefully, it will fund a lot of things that the project cannot fund. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
