|
|
|
|
|
|
by rbanffy
5537 days ago
|
|
|
As long as you are happy with the [insert (possibly proprietary) alternative] solution, I'm happy too. Would you consider paying up to what [insert (possibly proprietary) alternative] costs for someone to write the patch for you? Would you consider gathering more people so you can fund your patch? |
|
|
For the latter, probably not. Assuming that for whatever reason I cannot write the patch myself, I do not have the time to start a new organization every time I encounter a new bug in some project. And I would guess that most ordinary consumers don't either.
This is not supposed to be a necessarily snarky response. Sometimes, an open source project exists, and it's not for everyone. The people behind the project should realize that every feature they choose not to include cause the software's value proposition to cease to exist for some users. It is up to them what to prioritize, and up to me whether using their software is worth the time of getting a patch committed.
Of course, my operating assumption here is that they want to hear about bugs/feature requests, and so it is worth something to them that I would bring it up in the 1st place. But I rarely ever make new feature requests. Usually this is in response to an evangelist telling me that I should switch to their platform, and my responding that it does not replace a current proprietary solution.