On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 11:55 PM, Conrad Schneiker <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've repeatedly encountered remarks about how much Perl 6
> development is constrained by the fairly severe time and
> energy constraints of its overwhelmingly volunteer
> development team.
Here is something to consider. Unless we can afford to fund an individual
full time with enough money for them to pay for their own health coverage
and other benefits, the amount of time they are volunteering is already as
much as they can afford. In other words, they still have to work a regular
job and make time for their family (or whatever substitutes for the real
world) and giving them money isn't going to equate to them being able to
devote to more time. That isn't to say that these volunteers don't deserve
to get compensated but it is unrealistic to expect that money will equate to
more time in many of the cases.
The statement above does not apply to everyone and those who do freelance
and consulting work could likely devote a great deal more time if they would
be compensated in some way for their time.
I myself, with a few others, made a failed attempt at funding Audrey to work
on Pugs full time and her rate was ridiculously low - $100 USD/day.
> So over the next few months, I'm planning to learn about
> fundraising, and see what I can accomplish on behalf of Perl
> 6 development. To that end, I'm soliciting:
> (1) your suggestions for preparation,
> (2) your ideas for proposals, and
> (3) your reasons why the Perl 6 ecosystem (including Parrot
> and CPAN6) is one of the world's greatest and and most
> extremely leveraged causes (technically, economically,
> and socially).
I am mostly ignoring the rest of what others have said in this thread
because I think it is detracting from your intention of getting money to
people to work more. Here is one thing that has frustrated me about TPF.
They are a non-profit organization. Yeah, kind of suprising that would be
the frustrating thing. The issue is that they can't take money from Bob to
give to Sue to work on Bob's widget. This is an extreme oversimplification
but in general, they have to abide by the rules that allow them to keep
their non-profit status. Where am I going with this?
Regardless if we use TPF or not, I think what will get more people to
contribute is having some say as to where there money goes. To that end, I
suggest having a list of projects currently being funded. A donator can
choose which fund their money goes to or can choose a general fund if they
don't care. I don't suggest these projects be generic and nebulous either
(though they could be for the same reason a general fund is). In other
words, there might be a Rakudo fund - generic. There might also be a fund
to fix RT # 31415 which is a Rakudo bug.
I am not suggesting this is the solution to all the problems. It likely
will create more. What I can tell you is the number one thing that has
prevented me from donating a lot more money is having little to no control
over where it went. Actually, it has been years since I have contributed to
TPF. Now, I just write a check to the individual(s) I want to help. I
don't get the tax write off but I know where my money is going.
In closing, what we don't need is something to fight over. Hopefully you
will find the sweet spot - I sure hope you do.