View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
August 28, 2012
Re: D-etractions A real world programmers view on D
On Monday, 27 August 2012 at 23:28:31 UTC, SomeDude wrote:
> I wish Walter went on kickstarter to get public funds allowing 
> him to hire a couple of full time developers.

I would pitch in $150 for that.
August 28, 2012
Re: D-etractions A real world programmers view on D
On Tuesday, 28 August 2012 at 00:14:34 UTC, Chris Cain wrote:
> On Monday, 27 August 2012 at 23:28:31 UTC, SomeDude wrote:
>> I wish Walter went on kickstarter to get public funds allowing 
>> him to hire a couple of full time developers.
>
> I would pitch in $150 for that.

 I'd throw in $50, or $10-$15 each month for as long as it was 
needed. Perhaps putting up a option to give donations via paypal 
or something. Then when he accumulates a thousand or something 
that would hire for a while, Maybe get some help from FSF as well.
August 28, 2012
Re: D-etractions A real world programmers view on D
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:39:55 -0500, Era Scarecrow <rtcvb32@yahoo.com>  
wrote:

> On Tuesday, 28 August 2012 at 00:14:34 UTC, Chris Cain wrote:
>> On Monday, 27 August 2012 at 23:28:31 UTC, SomeDude wrote:
>>> I wish Walter went on kickstarter to get public funds allowing him to  
>>> hire a couple of full time developers.
>>
>> I would pitch in $150 for that.
>
>   I'd throw in $50, or $10-$15 each month for as long as it was needed.  
> Perhaps putting up a option to give donations via paypal or something.  
> Then when he accumulates a thousand or something that would hire for a  
> while, Maybe get some help from FSF as well.

I would throw in for that.

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
August 28, 2012
Re: D-etractions A real world programmers view on D
On Monday, 27 August 2012 at 23:28:31 UTC, SomeDude wrote:
> On Saturday, 25 August 2012 at 19:48:33 UTC, Jeff Nowakowski 
> wrote:
>
>> As for the IDE, he mentioned Scala, and there the developers 
>> made an effort to support the IDE in the compiler so that work 
>> wouldn't be duplicated and the IDE would support the latest 
>> language release. They also had funding and hired somebody to 
>> work on the Eclipse plugin full time.
>
> I wish Walter went on kickstarter to get public funds allowing 
> him to hire a couple of full time developers.

vote++
August 30, 2012
Re: D-etractions A real world programmers view on D
On 28/08/12 00:28, SomeDude wrote:
> I wish Walter went on kickstarter to get public funds allowing him to hire a
> couple of full time developers.

Yes, but you have to be cautious about things like that.  Having people paid by 
the project to work on things can demotivate the efforts of other contributors.

There is another project I have some connection to where one of the major 
contributors, a freelance developer, started soliciting donations to enable him 
to dedicate work time to the project, with in particular a promise that if more 
than a certain threshold could be raised, he'd be full-time on it.

The effect of this was decidedly ambivalent, with several project members 
feeling they didn't contribute to the project so that other people could make 
money off it.  It's not clear that the extra time he dedicated was worth the 
loss of those other contributions.

It's a different thing if some 3rd party comes in and says, "OK, we're going to 
pay some of our staff to work on this project."  But having the project itself 
select certain people to be paid, or having project members solicit donations in 
this way, can be problematic.

At the very least you'd need to define the parameters and expectations quite 
precisely, so that people can see where it does or doesn't overlap with work 
they might have contributed as volunteers.
August 30, 2012
Re: D-etractions A real world programmers view on D
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:54:33 -0400, Joseph Rushton Wakeling  
<joseph.wakeling@webdrake.net> wrote:

> On 28/08/12 00:28, SomeDude wrote:
>> I wish Walter went on kickstarter to get public funds allowing him to  
>> hire a
>> couple of full time developers.
>
> Yes, but you have to be cautious about things like that.  Having people  
> paid by the project to work on things can demotivate the efforts of  
> other contributors.
>
> There is another project I have some connection to where one of the  
> major contributors, a freelance developer, started soliciting donations  
> to enable him to dedicate work time to the project, with in particular a  
> promise that if more than a certain threshold could be raised, he'd be  
> full-time on it.
>
> The effect of this was decidedly ambivalent, with several project  
> members feeling they didn't contribute to the project so that other  
> people could make money off it.  It's not clear that the extra time he  
> dedicated was worth the loss of those other contributions.
>
> It's a different thing if some 3rd party comes in and says, "OK, we're  
> going to pay some of our staff to work on this project."  But having the  
> project itself select certain people to be paid, or having project  
> members solicit donations in this way, can be problematic.
>
> At the very least you'd need to define the parameters and expectations  
> quite precisely, so that people can see where it does or doesn't overlap  
> with work they might have contributed as volunteers.

Um what?  If someone wants to solicit donations in order to work on D,  
there is *nothing* that we can do to stop that.

What do we do, reject that contributor?  I think that's a much worse plan  
of action.  D needs all the help it can get, and if someone can only  
contribute full time if he gets paid, and people are willing to pay him,  
GREAT!

I fail to see how this story has any moral except, "some people hate  
money".  Which really isn't most of us here.  Myself in particular, I have  
very little time to work on D because I have a full time job so I can  
support my family, and a paying side gig.

-Steve
August 30, 2012
Re: D-etractions A real world programmers view on D
On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 15:39:14 -0400, Walter Bright  
<newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> On 8/25/2012 6:03 AM, Peter Alexander wrote:
>> Okay, so bitfields are rarely used, but many templates involve some use  
>> of CTFE,
>> and templates are very common in D code. It's good that D's parser is  
>> fairly
>> simple to implement (compared to C++ anyway), but to do automated  
>> refactoring
>> you need simple semantic analysis, and this is something that D does  
>> not have.
>
> How many IDEs can handle the C preprocessor, with token pasting and all,  
> when refactoring?

Not any that I have used.  In fact, in one project that I was working from  
an existing code base, I had to configure Visual Studio 2010 to NOT fade  
out what it thought was commented code, because it was wrong.  Otherwise,  
it was too distracting.

Here is what I think:

1. an IDE can be built that refactors non-meta-generated code quite well,  
D is easily parsed.
2. Said IDE can be provided hooks so when it does encounter mixins, it can  
be told what things mean.

For example, I use netbeans to write php -- a dynamic language.  There are  
no real variable type declarations, so when you start typing,  
auto-complete sucks unless you have told the IDE what a variable is.  You  
do so like this:

/**
 @var Type
 */
var $varname;

And now the IDE assumes you have stored a Type into $varname, so when you  
type $this->varname->, it completes with the members of Type.  Without the  
comment, I get nothing.

A similar approach could be taken with mixins, like bitfields.  You  
identify what the parameters to the mixin are, and then the IDE can take  
appropriate actions.

For things like bitfields, which are considered core language constructs  
in phobos, the IDE may actually be made more intelligent and detect this  
automatically.

I don't think this is an unsolvable problem...

-Steve
August 30, 2012
Re: D-etractions A real world programmers view on D
On 30/08/12 14:21, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> Um what?  If someone wants to solicit donations in order to work on D, there is
> *nothing* that we can do to stop that.

I'm not saying that you can or should stop independent individuals soliciting 
donations.  It's just something where everyone concerned needs to think a bit 
about how it can affect the dynamic of the project.

In this case, someone was suggesting that a donation drive be organized by the 
project, to pay developers to work on something.  That's something a bit 
different, because it's _the project_ saying who gets paid, and for what.  It 
can work, but it can mean people are less motivated to volunteer, because gosh, 
the project can afford to _hire_ people to do this now.

> What do we do, reject that contributor?  I think that's a much worse plan of
> action.  D needs all the help it can get, and if someone can only contribute
> full time if he gets paid, and people are willing to pay him, GREAT!

That's why I said it makes a difference whether payment is organized by 3rd 
parties, or the project itself.  (In the case of the project I referred to, it 
was technically one developer soliciting for donations, but he was so core to 
the project that it felt a bit different to some people.)

> I fail to see how this story has any moral except, "some people hate money".
> Which really isn't most of us here.  Myself in particular, I have very little
> time to work on D because I have a full time job so I can support my family, and
> a paying side gig.

Yes.  Now consider how you might react if the parts of D you were contributing 
to were also being worked on by people who the D project was paying for.  You 
might well feel, "Well, that stuff already has sufficient resources dedicated to 
it, so I'm going to use my limited free time for something else."  That's not 
hating money, just a rational reaction to the fact that your limited volunteer 
time should be put where it's needed most.

But if enough volunteer contributors react like that, the project suffers.

Simon Phipps (former Sun Open Source chief, now on the OSI board) has written an 
interesting article about the dynamics of money in open source projects, worth 
reading:
http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2011/09/should-you-donate-to-open-source-projects/index.htm
August 30, 2012
Re: D-etractions A real world programmers view on D
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 10:27:39 -0400, Joseph Rushton Wakeling  
<joseph.wakeling@webdrake.net> wrote:

> On 30/08/12 14:21, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> I fail to see how this story has any moral except, "some people hate  
>> money".
>> Which really isn't most of us here.  Myself in particular, I have very  
>> little
>> time to work on D because I have a full time job so I can support my  
>> family, and
>> a paying side gig.
>
> Yes.  Now consider how you might react if the parts of D you were  
> contributing to were also being worked on by people who the D project  
> was paying for.  You might well feel, "Well, that stuff already has  
> sufficient resources dedicated to it, so I'm going to use my limited  
> free time for something else."  That's not hating money, just a rational  
> reaction to the fact that your limited volunteer time should be put  
> where it's needed most.
>
> But if enough volunteer contributors react like that, the project  
> suffers.

I cannot relate to that at all.  Nor do I think the project suffers.

When I work on a piece of D, it's because I want it to work the way I  
want.  I want to have influence over its design so it appeals to me.  It  
has nothing to do with who paid for what.  In fact, I don't even care  
about getting credit, I just want a language that I enjoy using!

I throw out suggestions all the time, but they are almost always ignored.   
But when I actually contribute, it has a much better chance of success,  
and I have had several of my contributions included in both Tango and D2  
phobos/druntime.

My gut feeling (no research for this, just how I feel) is that people who  
feel their time is better spent elsewhere, but truly want to contribute,  
probably would work on some other part of D that *doesn't* have resources  
dedicated to it, or a library that uses D.  I don't think D suffers for  
this.

I think some people have a somewhat biased attitude that if a project  
isn't developed by all volunteers, it's "impure".  I know there are some  
who won't even touch D because of DMD's license, even though that has  
nothing to do with produced code :)  I don't know if this applies to your  
anecdote because I know nothing about the community there.  But there  
isn't much we can do about that, and if we don't have those people on  
board, I don't really think we are worse off.  I want to have people that  
are good at solving problems, good at writing code, and *want* to  
contribute, not people who have alternate agendas.  We cannot cater to  
every social viewpoint, so the best thing we can do is produce the best  
language we can, and if we do, others will want to use it and contribute  
to it.

Now, if D got to the point where it frequently preferred code that was  
paid for over code that was donated, solely based on the fact that one was  
paid for and one wasn't, that would not work out well.  We can't be biased  
in either direction, and then I think our community will be fine.

> Simon Phipps (former Sun Open Source chief, now on the OSI board) has  
> written an interesting article about the dynamics of money in open  
> source projects, worth reading:
> http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2011/09/should-you-donate-to-open-source-projects/index.htm

I will check it out, thanks.

-Steve
August 30, 2012
Re: D-etractions A real world programmers view on D
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 11:21:06 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer  
<schveiguy@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 10:27:39 -0400, Joseph Rushton Wakeling  
> <joseph.wakeling@webdrake.net> wrote:
>> Simon Phipps (former Sun Open Source chief, now on the OSI board) has  
>> written an interesting article about the dynamics of money in open  
>> source projects, worth reading:
>> http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2011/09/should-you-donate-to-open-source-projects/index.htm
>
> I will check it out, thanks.

An interesting point of view, and I can see how paying someone could be  
misconstrued.  If Walter was given money to hire people, and he hired  
certain already-active members of the community, it might leave some  
thinking "why them and not me?"  One thing I think would pose a large  
dilemma is who do you pay?  Someone who is very active in contributing to  
D may not be able to contribute more, simply because there are just so  
many hours in a day.  I'm amazed sometimes as to how some people do so  
much work on D!  This means we're just handing out bonuses without getting  
much back.

But then would you pay someone like me, who has contributed very  
sporadically?  Maybe it makes it so I can contribute more, but it's almost  
like rewarding me for being less active!

Paying someone in the community is like giving a company more money to  
develop a project faster, but instead they just pay their existing staff  
more.

If, however, Walter simply just hired two developers *outside* the  
community, and added them to the project, it would be a net gain for  
everyone.  Two previously uninvolved developers who could make the  
development go faster.  Perhaps that's the only real way to fund a project  
like this.

I agree with Mr. Phipps that the best way probably to fund an open source  
project is to purchase from a company who benefits from the language  
itself, and let them know why.  Then they have an incentive to make  
contributions ensuring they continue to receive that revenue.

I don't find this much different than paying someone who volunteers via  
donations, except that you aren't getting any benefit via service, just  
better language.

Thanks for the interesting read!

-Steve
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home