Hi, If support for funding will be getting implemented, I don't think this should be limited only to plugins. It should be available as an option for any project.
Also, of course, some plugin will need to be used to display this information during the building. It would probably be useful for it to be a separate plugin. Kind regards, Martin On Fri, 22 Aug 2025, 15:02 Christoph Läubrich, <m...@laeubi-soft.de> wrote: > I'm really not sure that this is the right place... we are talking about > plugins right? > > And plugins have plugin.xml (shipped with the jar) where poms are for > the projects itself. So do we really want just another thing that is > exclusivity for plugins in the pom (and must be validated like > <prerequisites>)? Or should regular projects use that as well (could > make sense of course) so if one uses a _dependency_ to my super cool > library maven shows the funding message as well? > > > Am 22.08.25 um 13:55 schrieb Martin Todorov: > > Hello again, > > > > I actually think that now is a good time to add this information as new > > tags in the pom.xml. > > > > Consider something like this: > > > > <fundingOptions> > > <fundingOption> > > <id>github-sponshoring</id> > > <description>GitHub Sponsoring</description> > > <url>https://github.com/whatever/whatever/</url> > > </fundingOption> > > </fundingOptions> > > > > There could be multiple funding/sponsoring options and for each of them > > there might need to be one or more URL-s. For example you kight have a > > Patreon account, or a buymeabeer/coffee, or even just plain payment links > > for PayPal/Revolut, etc. > > > > There will be a new version of the POM which means Maven is evolving. In > my > > opinion, it would really make more sense to use this opportunity and show > > to the world that Maven is also learning from other ecosystems and > > platforms and, at least to me, the best option would be the POM. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 22 Aug 2025, 14:37 Christoph Läubrich, <m...@laeubi-soft.de> > wrote: > > > >> I agree with Martins elaboration here. > >> > >> If I get a tool for free it valid to show support options like others do > >> (e.g. Firefox, Wikipedia, ...), if I don't like that I'm free to build > >> my own version of the tool without it. > >> > >> In general it would be good if maven can show some meta-data for the > >> plugin e.g. devlopers, SCML urls and so on so if there is an issue (or > >> interest) one do not need to find it out manually. > >> > >> So 'mvn dependency:info' seems more useful and it can then include > >> possible support/funding options as well. > >> > >> Regarding _where_ to place the information, I think it might not need to > >> be the pom.xml but better use the plugin.xml of the plugin that already > >> contains some additional information and should be easier to enhance. > >> Or one could even have an additional plugin-info.xml file for those > >> information. > >> > >> > >> Am 22.08.25 um 13:14 schrieb Martin Todorov: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I think this is actually a splendid idea! > >>> > >>> I've been thinking about why Maven doesn't have this a lot lately, as I > >> run > >>> quite a few projects of my own. OSS is free, but it would make our > lives > >> a > >>> lot easier, if we had ways to get funding for our projects. I have one > >> such > >>> project that gets commissioned work every now and then from > corporations > >>> that need certain functionality further improved. > >>> > >>> 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. Nowadays, it seems to > >> be > >>> important if not even vital to have several such means of income with > the > >>> instabilities and mass layoffs happening in the software world. What > >>> exactly is wrong with that? Of course, sometimes you will prioritize > paid > >>> fixes, but that's still in the interest of the project. > >>> > >>> If there is better visibility for funding options for OSS projects more > >>> both projects and developers will thrive. > >>> > >>> Also -- have a look at Gradle -- they have a company backing the > project > >>> and funding it. Maven is completely OSS and lacking funding options > makes > >>> development and fixes much slower paced because people have limited > free > >>> time to devote to it. > >>> > >>> In my opinion adding tags for this in the new version of the POM will > >> only > >>> help. > >>> > >>> It will then be up to the respective projects to figure out how to > manage > >>> the funds. There are great things Maven has brought to the world of > >>> software development. However, there are also good ideas it can embrace > >>> from other languages and ecosystems. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> > >>> Martin > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, 22 Aug 2025, 11:58 Gary Gregory, <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> Our lives are already so flooded with advertising, spam, and scams... > >> do we > >>>> really want another vector to watch out for, be irritated by, and > >> ignore? > >>>> > >>>> Gary > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2025, 04:53 Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi, > >>>>> While having a play with npm recently, I came across this message: > >>>>> 117 packages are looking for funding > >>>>> run `npm fund` for details > >>>>> > >>>>> That got me thinking, why don’t we have something similar in the > Maven > >>>>> ecosystem? > >>>>> > >>>>> Plenty of the artifacts published to Maven Central come from > >>>>> individuals who’d probably appreciate a small donation (a bit of > “beer > >>>>> money”), or from companies that provide professional or commercial > >>>>> support for their open-source libraries. GitHub already offers a > >>>>> funding button, but in the Maven world, we don’t help surface this > >>>>> sort of information. > >>>>> > >>>>> So here’s an idea: what if projects could include > >>>>> documented/formalised metadata in their POMs that Maven core and/or > >>>>> plugins could use? Since we can’t change the POM structure itself, we > >>>>> could start with some standardised properties, for example: > >>>>> > >>>>> <properties> > >>>>> <support.commercial.0>URL</support.commercial.0> > >>>>> <support.eol.0>DATE</support.eol.0> > >>>>> <support.security.0>DATE</support.security.0> > >>>>> <support.commercial.1>URL</support.commercial.1> > >>>>> > >>>>> <funding.url.0>URL</funding.url.0> > >>>>> <funding.url.1>URL</funding.url.1> > >>>>> </properties> > >>>>> > >>>>> We could then imagine new goals such as: > >>>>> - dependency:fund > >>>>> - dependency:support > >>>>> > >>>>> And, just like npm, Maven could finish the build with a simple > summary: > >>>>> > >>>>> X artefacts have commercial support or are looking for funding > >>>>> run mvn dependency:fund or mvn dependency:support for details > >>>>> > >>>>> To be clear, this isn’t about Apache Maven requiring the metadata, > but > >>>>> rather about encouraging a general convention for artifacts in Maven > >>>>> Central. > >>>>> > >>>>> What do you reckon? > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers, > >>>>> Olivier > >>>>> > >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > >> > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
