Hi list,
I'm curious to hear your point of view to this: the university asked me to review the list of software they want to order for the department. They've got also Max/MSP and Jitter on the list. This is a nice thing but my point is: the students already work with PD, why should they use and learn software they might not be able to afford after they leave the university? I guess you all agree that the money should rather be spent in PD development. but since there is no license to aquire the university can't ask companys to give bids on this deal. how can open source projects handle this? any suggestions?
hi max,
I read:
I'm curious to hear your point of view to this: the university asked me to review the list of software they want to order for the department.
nice at least they _ask_
the university? I guess you all agree that the money should rather be spent in PD development. but since there is no license to aquire the university can't ask companys to give bids on this deal. how can open source projects handle this? any suggestions?
well we are facing a similar problem here but (our it center at least recently donated some money to more traditional projects (I don't ex- actly remember what it was but along the lines of postfix, spamasassin etc...)
For example, I invited tom schouten for a lecture to give something back (while of course leeching some of his energy on the way ;), the travel was paid by a small festival run by some friends.
a few options you might consider:
donations/paypal -- relatively hard to convince the buerocrats but it can work and I suspect when it has been done once already it gets easier next time.
inviting devrs -- usually rather small amounts that can be spent on guest lectures but a unique opportunity for students and staff to relate faces to email adresses and to talk about future plans.
commissioning -- again tough with the buerocrats but a good way to give stuff back to the community (if you can explain why the result should be gpl/bsd style licensed so the uni can't make any - rather virtual anyway - profits from it)
docs/faqs/examples -- actually you commit a lot to the community if your students work on such things and release the results to the general public.
conferences -- setting up a mini festival / conference is also a nice way to show your support (see also the 2nd point) and might help to gain some publicity out- side of your department - should make it easier at some point to convince the buerocrats ;)
just my 0.02EUR
regards,
x
Le 16 Mai 2005 19:07, Max Neupert a écrit :
Hi list,
I'm curious to hear your point of view to this: the university asked me to review the list of software they want to order for the department. They've got also Max/MSP and Jitter on the list. This is a nice thing but my point is: the students already work with PD, why should they use and learn software they might not be able to afford after they leave the university? I guess you all agree that the money should rather be spent in PD development. but since there is no license to aquire the university can't ask companys to give bids on this deal. how can open source projects handle this? any suggestions?
Ask to the PD maintainers to sell copies of their installers to your university. This is a perfectly legal and simple way to solve your problem. -- Marc
I read:
Ask to the PD maintainers to sell copies of their installers to your university. This is a perfectly legal and simple way to solve your problem.
while this might sound good at first I think as a tax funded institution you'll run into all sorts of problems for buying something you could aswell have downloaded for free ... I think it takes a little more political work to explain that you are actually funding a free project and not just blowing tax money on your friends.
regards,
x
Le 16 Mai 2005 20:17, CK a écrit :
I read:
Ask to the PD maintainers to sell copies of their installers to your university. This is a perfectly legal and simple way to solve your problem.
while this might sound good at first I think as a tax funded institution you'll run into all sorts of problems for buying something you could aswell have downloaded for free ... I think it takes a little more political work to explain that you are actually funding a free project and not just blowing tax money on your friends.
The price can be zero, or the price of the media.
Marc
I read:
The price can be zero, or the price of the media.
which wouldn't be that large a funding for the project, would it ?
;)
x
Le 16 Mai 2005 20:49, CK a écrit :
I read:
The price can be zero, or the price of the media.
which wouldn't be that large a funding for the project, would it ?
;)
Max would like the students to use PD, and his university wants to buy software. PD can be distributed legally for free or for a price, so selling it for almost nothing is an easy way to invest. Funding development projects later will be much easier if students already use PD. -- Marc
hi all,
Am Dienstag 17 Mai 2005 01:07 schrieb Max Neupert:
Hi list,
[..snip..]
the university? I guess you all agree that the money should rather be spent in PD development. but since there is no license to aquire the university can't ask companys to give bids on this deal. how can open source projects handle this? any suggestions?
personally i think that idea of "bounties" is a good one: http://www.gnome.org/bounties/
that way, needed aspects of the project can be funded, and institutions should be happy with that as well. after all they can call it funding the development of what they need.....
anyone else thought about setting up a bounties page for pd ?
maybe its even possible to set up a public society (verein in germany) for pd and its surroundings.... that society could be then raising funds and distribute that to developers, meetings, etc. in germany, all that takes are just 7 people ...
"verein zur foerderung und verbreitung von dataflow-umgebungen, elektronischer kunst und kommunikation" doesnt that sound fancy ? ;-D
greets,
chris
personally i think that idea of "bounties" is a good one: http://www.gnome.org/bounties/
that way, needed aspects of the project can be funded, and institutions should be happy with that as well. after all they can call it funding the development of what they need.....
anyone else thought about setting up a bounties page for pd ?
i think hans proposed using a bounty system for the pd development... i like this idea very much ... of course this can be used to introduce features to devel ... but if the institution would want to stick with a "stable", "official" branch ... forget it ...
but for the first ... what about a wiki on pd.org?
cheers... t
Le 17 Mai 2005 07:27, Thomas Grill a écrit :
what i don't like about the bounty system, is the idea of "competition" or "hunt" which is not really compatible with "community" to my mind.
Think of the competition in the free software world as something refered to coopetition in the commercial world. -- Marc
On May 17, 2005, at 7:27 AM, Thomas Grill wrote:
Hi,
i think hans proposed using a bounty system for the pd development...
i like this idea very much ...what i don't like about the bounty system, is the idea of
"competition" or "hunt" which is not really compatible with
"community" to my mind.
In theory, I guess bounties could be competitive. But in practice, I
don't think they would be. For the most part, Pd devs work on there
own stuff, and there isn't much overlap. So bounties would allow users
to fund the development of features that they want thru a process that
is much more open than just giving money to a specific developer.
We definitely should discuss this more. SourceForge has a mechanism
for accepting donations for the group, but the hard part is figuring
out how this group would handle the money. One idea is to have one
developer, one vote, and work that way. Each developer registered with
SourceForge would have a vote. Those who have contributed lots to Pd
but are not currently part of the SF project would be encouraged to
join.
Just my two bits...
.hc
"Looking at things from a more basic level, you can come up with a more
direct solution... It may sound small in theory, but it in practice, it
can change entire economies."
- Amy Smith
I think the idea of Christian to form a non profit organization that receives the money is a good one. The money then would be spend for meetings like the pd-dev meeting, workshops, etc. The meetings get organized by the developers community.
The bounty systems doesn't convince me.
Guenter
On Wed, 18 May 2005, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On May 17, 2005, at 7:27 AM, Thomas Grill wrote:
Hi,
i think hans proposed using a bounty system for the pd development... i like this idea very much ...
what i don't like about the bounty system, is the idea of "competition" or "hunt" which is not really compatible with "community" to my mind.
In theory, I guess bounties could be competitive. But in practice, I don't think they would be. For the most part, Pd devs work on there own stuff, and there isn't much overlap. So bounties would allow users to fund the development of features that they want thru a process that is much more open than just giving money to a specific developer.
We definitely should discuss this more. SourceForge has a mechanism for accepting donations for the group, but the hard part is figuring out how this group would handle the money. One idea is to have one developer, one vote, and work that way. Each developer registered with SourceForge would have a vote. Those who have contributed lots to Pd but are not currently part of the SF project would be encouraged to join.
Just my two bits...
.hc
"Looking at things from a more basic level, you can come up with a more direct solution... It may sound small in theory, but it in practice, it can change entire economies."
- Amy Smith
I think the idea of Christian to form a non profit organization that receives the money is a good one. The money then would be spend for meetings like the pd-dev meeting, workshops, etc. The meetings get organized by the developers community.
i'm a bit afraid of the overhead of managing a non profit organization ... i mean the pd community is not as big as for example the firefox or the openoffice community ...
The bounty systems doesn't convince me.
well, maybe not call it bounty hunt but market place, where people could post their feature requests. once a request is assigned to a developer no one else is supposed to work on this ...
this would definitely be easier to maintain ...
cheers ... tim
On May 18, 2005, at 6:52 AM, Tim Blechmann wrote:
I think the idea of Christian to form a non profit organization that receives the money is a good one. The money then would be spend for meetings like the pd-dev meeting, workshops, etc. The meetings get organized by the developers community.
i'm a bit afraid of the overhead of managing a non profit organization ... i mean the pd community is not as big as for example the firefox or the openoffice community ...
I agree. Also, a Verein might be useful in Germany/Austria, but does it
apply to the EU? I think it has little meaning in the U.S. and Canada.
How about Brazil, Egypt, Malaysia, Bulgaria, Japan? Setting up an
international NGO would be a ton of legal work, and not very productive
at this stage, I think.
But before we get sidetracked about all sorts of ideas about how to
manage the money, there is one issue that must get resolved before
anything else: how we make decisions as a group. We can discuss ideas
all day, but if we don't have a system for making decisions, then all
those ideas will remain just that: ideas.
There are a few ideas out there for how to do this: Debian-style
developer elections, core developer consensus. I believe that the
GNOME Bounties works on a developer consensus model: the developers who
work on a given part of GNOME agree on the decisions. With Debian,
Developers vote on resolutions and the Project Leader.
I think that the Debian developer elections would work best for the Pd
community.
.hc
The bounty systems doesn't convince me.
well, maybe not call it bounty hunt but market place, where people
could post their feature requests. once a request is assigned to a developer no one else is supposed to work on this ...this would definitely be easier to maintain ...
cheers ... tim
--
mailto:TimBlechmann@gmx.de ICQ: 96771783 http://www.mokabar.tklatest mp3: kMW.mp3 http://mattin.org/mp3.html
latest cd: Goh Lee Kwang & Tim Blechmann: Drone http://www.geocities.com/gohleekwangtimblechmannduo/
After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space would say "I want to see the manager." William S. Burroughs
"Looking at things from a more basic level, you can come up with a more
direct solution... It may sound small in theory, but it in practice, it
can change entire economies."
- Amy Smith
There are a few ideas out there for how to do this: Debian-style
developer elections, core developer consensus. I believe that the
GNOME Bounties works on a developer consensus model: the developers who work on a given part of GNOME agree on the decisions. With Debian, Developers vote on resolutions and the Project Leader.
i'm not sure, if we need votes, but definitely a developer consensus ... just to make sure that the development goes to the right direction and is not stuck because of unmade decisions ...
cheers ... tim
hi everyone,
it's good to see that this issue is being discussed here ...
what i don't like about the bounty system, is the idea of "competition" or "hunt" which is not really compatible with "community" to my mind.
I agree. Then again, the pd community (like any other open source community) is probably not as coherent as it seems to be at a first glance: there are the developers working on the software package and the users that use it for whatever their purposes are. There is a fundamental difference between developers and users: developers implement the stuff they are missing, while users are unable to do so, because they are - well, just users. Enthusiastic users most of the time (and especially with regard to pure data), but still - they can't program, and this is not due to a lack of will, but to a lack of knowledge that can't be alleviated within a month or so. From this point of view, bounties might be a good instrument to bring developers and users closer together - after all, the things that the average Joe User is missing in pd are not necessarily less important than the new and nifty things the average developer is implementing at the same time. Needless to say, this is not meant to be a rant or an insult towards the devs or Joe User ... I see bounties as an additional incentive for developers to implement this or that often requested feature. Admittedly, we would introduce some sort of market mechanism into the shiny new world of open source development, but - unless every child learns to program c++ in kindergarten, open source won't change the world anyway ... it will definitely not abolish capitalism. or so i guess.
my 2 cents, Thoralf.
___________________________________________________________ Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden: http://mail.yahoo.de
On Wed, 18 May 2005 15:09:55 +0200, Thoralf Schulze
thoralf_schulze@yahoo.de wrote:
hi everyone,
it's good to see that this issue is being discussed here ...
what i don't like about the bounty system, is the idea of "competition" or "hunt" which is not really compatible with "community" to my mind.
I agree. Then again, the pd community (like any other open source community) is probably not as coherent as it seems to be at a first glance: there are the developers working on the software package and the users that use it for whatever their purposes are. There is a fundamental difference between developers and users:
<rant> No there isn't, especially for something like pd which is a programming language as much as a program. There is a sliding scale between users and programmers. this whole difference between devs and users is artificial and a product of the closed source software industry. </rant>
Not that everybody needs to code, but the idea that coding is a
fundamentally different activity from using is wrong. Part of the magic
computer mystique.
From this point of view, bounties might be a good instrument to bring developers and users closer together - after all, the things that the average Joe User is missing in pd are not necessarily less important than the new and nifty things the average developer is implementing at the same time.
The problem is the price tag. How much does it cost to implement feature
z, who determines who gets the job. Can I put up bounties for features and
then code them myself if some institution gives money? Can I code features
first but keep them to myself untill somebody coughs up some dough?
Bounties might work for something where there are only two or three
developers and the program has a more strict licence than pd.
Use the money to pay some developers to come install and lecture on the
stuff. Start a pd development group locally. Or commision somebody for a
piece of music or an installation or a piece of software. Or get some
funky hardware for the money. Sensors and stuff like that.
The pd community is too loose for something really official. And I
personally like that.
another 2 c
Gerard
The pd community is too loose for something really official.
-IRCAM tried to incorporate both with jMax. With the result that it more or less ended up on the scrap heap. The strength of PD is not only the program itself, but also the different ways people use it. To put that in a kind of straight-jacket, will not work and also kill it.
AvS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....................................................................
` |Schreck Ensemble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +
` |# -laboratory for live electro-acoustic music- # |
| http://www.schreck.nl/ |
| http://www.xs4all.nl/~schreck/ |
` *===========================================================++
` |Compositions http://www.xs4all.nl/~schreck/html/compo.html |
` |Samples http://www.xs4all.nl/~schreck/html/samp.html |
` |Patches http://www.xs4all.nl/~schreck/html/pat.html |
` |Videos http://www.xs4all.nl/~schreck/html/video.html |
` |Scores http://www.xs4all.nl/~schreck/html/scores.html |
*===========================================================++
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....................................................................
heya,
I agree with Gerard here. The thing that would isolate "developers" from "users" is largely due to some kind of techno-elitism.
I think all developers are users, but not all users are developers. Mind you since "abstractions" can be considered programs just as entire patches can be, clearly all users of PD are programmers in some sense.
Being a user who pretends to be a developers (or is it the other way around?) I think its pointless to draw lines between groups, when energy is better spent in dialog and building bridges.
As for bounties I don't know what to say, I've been supported for GPL projects though artist and government grants for a couple years now. I do think that a PD NGO that has a specific mandate (like PD education and advocacy, organizing and overseeing workshops and conferences, and indeed supplying funding for specific development projects.) A PD NGO could get "donations" and even apply for funding. It would be hard to do though, as anyone working in artist-run-centres knows.
B>
gerard van dongen wrote:
On Wed, 18 May 2005 15:09:55 +0200, Thoralf Schulze thoralf_schulze@yahoo.de wrote:
hi everyone,
it's good to see that this issue is being discussed here ...
what i don't like about the bounty system, is the idea of "competition" or "hunt" which is not really compatible with "community" to my mind.
I agree. Then again, the pd community (like any other open source community) is probably not as coherent as it seems to be at a first glance: there are the developers working on the software package and the users that use it for whatever their purposes are. There is a fundamental difference between developers and users:
<rant> No there isn't, especially for something like pd which is a programming language as much as a program. There is a sliding scale between users and programmers. this whole difference between devs and users is artificial and a product of the closed source software industry. </rant>
Not that everybody needs to code, but the idea that coding is a fundamentally different activity from using is wrong. Part of the magic computer mystique.
From this point of view, bounties might be a good instrument to bring developers and users closer together - after all, the things that the average Joe User is missing in pd are not necessarily less important than the new and nifty things the average developer is implementing at the same time.
The problem is the price tag. How much does it cost to implement feature z, who determines who gets the job. Can I put up bounties for features and then code them myself if some institution gives money? Can I code features first but keep them to myself untill somebody coughs up some dough?
Bounties might work for something where there are only two or three developers and the program has a more strict licence than pd.
Use the money to pay some developers to come install and lecture on the stuff. Start a pd development group locally. Or commision somebody for a piece of music or an installation or a piece of software. Or get some funky hardware for the money. Sensors and stuff like that.
The pd community is too loose for something really official. And I personally like that.
another 2 c
Gerard
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Hello,
I think there is a definite distinction between PD user and developer.
In fact, I would love to be a developer but I don't think I have the
knowledge I would need (though I do know some python and C++). For now
I am a mere user. Let me explain why I see a distinction between
developer and user (though I agree, developers are also users).
Honestly, as a new PD user, I'm a little disappointed at this list - and please don't take this the wrong way. I know the hardcore PD people are doing awesome work creating tools for the PD community. The problem is that I have NO IDEA what people are talking about 90% of the time on this list. I was hoping to gain much more practical knowledge on how to use PD. Instead, here I feel very intimidated by the high level of technical expertise.
I think it would be good if, along with developing new features and externals, some community members would devote more time to explaining more general information on possible ways to use PD, approaches to building patches, and descriptions of live performance patches. A great example of what I am talking about is the "Building Drums in PD" tutorial by Frank Barknecht available here: http://footils.org/tut/pddrums/pddrums.html . There is a really strong need for this type of tutorial! Also, I know people are doing workshops, it would also be helpful if people would post more of the information given at these workshops online. Finally, many of the externals seem almost undocumented. Sometimes ordinary "users" are going to need a lot more explanation/documentation of things - documentation that may seem redundant to the developers, because it is easy to forget that many of us have never worked with anything like this in our lives, and are learning computers also as we go.
Remember, all such documentation is going to make it easier for people
to learn PD, which will then result in a bigger and stronger community.
As a new user, I'd love to contribute, but the technical aspect of what
people discuss on this list seems way beyond me. However, if anyone
knows ways even a newer user can help, let me know!
~David Powers
B. Bogart wrote:
heya,
I agree with Gerard here. The thing that would isolate "developers" from "users" is largely due to some kind of techno-elitism.
I think all developers are users, but not all users are developers. Mind you since "abstractions" can be considered programs just as entire patches can be, clearly all users of PD are programmers in some sense.
Being a user who pretends to be a developers (or is it the other way around?) I think its pointless to draw lines between groups, when energy is better spent in dialog and building bridges.
As for bounties I don't know what to say, I've been supported for GPL projects though artist and government grants for a couple years now. I do think that a PD NGO that has a specific mandate (like PD education and advocacy, organizing and overseeing workshops and conferences, and indeed supplying funding for specific development projects.) A PD NGO could get "donations" and even apply for funding. It would be hard to do though, as anyone working in artist-run-centres knows.
B>
gerard van dongen wrote:
On Wed, 18 May 2005 15:09:55 +0200, Thoralf Schulze thoralf_schulze@yahoo.de wrote:
hi everyone,
it's good to see that this issue is being discussed here ...
what i don't like about the bounty system, is the idea of "competition" or "hunt" which is not really compatible with "community" to my mind.
I agree. Then again, the pd community (like any other open source community) is probably not as coherent as it seems to be at a first glance: there are the developers working on the software package and the users that use it for whatever their purposes are. There is a fundamental difference between developers and users:
<rant> No there isn't, especially for something like pd which is a programming language as much as a program. There is a sliding scale between users and programmers. this whole difference between devs and users is artificial and a product of the closed source software industry. </rant>
Not that everybody needs to code, but the idea that coding is a fundamentally different activity from using is wrong. Part of the magic computer mystique.
From this point of view, bounties might be a good instrument to bring developers and users closer together - after all, the things that the average Joe User is missing in pd are not necessarily less important than the new and nifty things the average developer is implementing at the same time.
The problem is the price tag. How much does it cost to implement feature z, who determines who gets the job. Can I put up bounties for features and then code them myself if some institution gives money? Can I code features first but keep them to myself untill somebody coughs up some dough?
Bounties might work for something where there are only two or three developers and the program has a more strict licence than pd.
Use the money to pay some developers to come install and lecture on the stuff. Start a pd development group locally. Or commision somebody for a piece of music or an installation or a piece of software. Or get some funky hardware for the money. Sensors and stuff like that.
The pd community is too loose for something really official. And I personally like that.
another 2 c
Gerard
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
I would love to contribute more answers to newbies on this list, but
time is limited, so I am spending that time instead on building Pd
documentation and tutorials. The PDDP stuff is gaining momentum, so
the documentation should improve rapidly in the coming months. Check
the recent pddp threads on the pd-dev list for more info.
.hc
On May 18, 2005, at 3:36 PM, David Powers wrote:
Hello,
I think there is a definite distinction between PD user and
developer. In fact, I would love to be a developer but I don't think
I have the knowledge I would need (though I do know some python and
C++). For now I am a mere user. Let me explain why I see a
distinction between developer and user (though I agree, developers are
also users).Honestly, as a new PD user, I'm a little disappointed at this list -
and please don't take this the wrong way. I know the hardcore PD
people are doing awesome work creating tools for the PD community.
The problem is that I have NO IDEA what people are talking about 90%
of the time on this list. I was hoping to gain much more practical
knowledge on how to use PD. Instead, here I feel very intimidated by
the high level of technical expertise.I think it would be good if, along with developing new features and
externals, some community members would devote more time to explaining
more general information on possible ways to use PD, approaches to
building patches, and descriptions of live performance patches. A
great example of what I am talking about is the "Building Drums in PD"
tutorial by Frank Barknecht available here:
http://footils.org/tut/pddrums/pddrums.html . There is a really
strong need for this type of tutorial! Also, I know people are doing
workshops, it would also be helpful if people would post more of the
information given at these workshops online. Finally, many of the
externals seem almost undocumented. Sometimes ordinary "users" are
going to need a lot more explanation/documentation of things -
documentation that may seem redundant to the developers, because it is
easy to forget that many of us have never worked with anything like
this in our lives, and are learning computers also as we go.Remember, all such documentation is going to make it easier for
people to learn PD, which will then result in a bigger and stronger
community. As a new user, I'd love to contribute, but the technical
aspect of what people discuss on this list seems way beyond me.
However, if anyone knows ways even a newer user can help, let me know!~David Powers
B. Bogart wrote:heya,
I agree with Gerard here. The thing that would isolate "developers"
from "users" is largely due to some kind of techno-elitism.I think all developers are users, but not all users are developers.
Mind you since "abstractions" can be considered programs just as entire patches can be, clearly all users of PD are programmers in some
sense.Being a user who pretends to be a developers (or is it the other way around?) I think its pointless to draw lines between groups, when
energy is better spent in dialog and building bridges.As for bounties I don't know what to say, I've been supported for GPL projects though artist and government grants for a couple years now.
I do think that a PD NGO that has a specific mandate (like PD education and advocacy, organizing and overseeing workshops and conferences,
and indeed supplying funding for specific development projects.) A PD NGO could get "donations" and even apply for funding. It would be hard
to do though, as anyone working in artist-run-centres knows.B>
gerard van dongen wrote:
On Wed, 18 May 2005 15:09:55 +0200, Thoralf Schulze thoralf_schulze@yahoo.de wrote:
hi everyone,
it's good to see that this issue is being discussed here ...
what i don't like about the bounty system, is the idea of "competition" or "hunt" which is not really compatible with "community" to my mind.
I agree. Then again, the pd community (like any other open source community) is probably not as coherent as it seems to be at a first glance: there are the developers working on the software package and the users that use it for whatever their purposes are. There is a fundamental difference between developers and users:
<rant> No there isn't, especially for something like pd which is a programming language as much as a program. There is a sliding scale between users and programmers. this whole difference between devs and users is artificial and a product of the closed source software industry. </rant>
Not that everybody needs to code, but the idea that coding is a fundamentally different activity from using is wrong. Part of the
magic computer mystique.From this point of view, bounties might be a good instrument to bring developers and users closer together - after all, the things that the average Joe User is missing in pd are not necessarily less important than the new and nifty things the average developer is implementing at the same time.
The problem is the price tag. How much does it cost to implement feature z, who determines who gets the job. Can I put up bounties
for features and then code them myself if some institution gives
money? Can I code features first but keep them to myself untill somebody
coughs up some dough?Bounties might work for something where there are only two or three developers and the program has a more strict licence than pd.
Use the money to pay some developers to come install and lecture on
the stuff. Start a pd development group locally. Or commision somebody
for a piece of music or an installation or a piece of software. Or get some funky hardware for the money. Sensors and stuff like that.The pd community is too loose for something really official. And I personally like that.
another 2 c
Gerard
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
As we enjoy great advantages from inventions of others, we should be
glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and
this we should do freely and generously.
- Benjamin Franklin
On May 18, 2005, at 10:10 AM, gerard van dongen wrote:
On Wed, 18 May 2005 15:09:55 +0200, Thoralf Schulze
thoralf_schulze@yahoo.de wrote:hi everyone,
it's good to see that this issue is being discussed here ...
what i don't like about the bounty system, is the idea of "competition" or "hunt" which is not really compatible with "community" to my mind.
I agree. Then again, the pd community (like any other open source community) is probably not as coherent as it seems to be at a first glance: there are the developers working on the software package and the users that use it for whatever their purposes are. There is a fundamental difference between developers and users:
<rant> No there isn't, especially for something like pd which is a programming language as much as a program. There is a sliding scale between users and programmers. this whole difference between devs and users is artificial and a product of the closed source software industry. </rant>
Not that everybody needs to code, but the idea that coding is a
fundamentally different activity from using is wrong. Part of the
magic computer mystique.
I totally agree. This goes along with my recent thread of using Pd to
implement as much of Pd as possible. This is how it works with C, C++,
Java, etc. Pd is a programming language, not just an app. If you are
patching, you are a programmer. But nonetheless, "developer" is a
useful distinction. It means someone who is actively working on the
core of Pd, rather than writing code purely for their own purposes.
Perhaps "developer" isn't the best word for this.
From this point of view, bounties might be a good instrument to bring developers and users closer together - after all, the things that the average Joe User is missing in pd are not necessarily less important than the new and nifty things the average developer is implementing at the same time.
The problem is the price tag. How much does it cost to implement
feature z, who determines who gets the job.
See my other email about figuring out how we make decisions. That has
to happen first. As for other decisions, I think we should make a
freer version of the GNOME bounties system. I think that anyone should
be allowed to post a bounty, and people who are giving the money can
choose what they want to support. We could use the Bug/Feature
Trackers on SourceForge to specify the bounties. Then when people give
money, they link that money to an existing Bug/Feature Tracker. When
someone submits code to fulfill that bounty, then there would be an
developer election as to whether to accept it. It would be
Yes/No/Abstain so people who aren't directly involved in the code that
the patch applies to could abstain if they wanted. (personally, I
would not want to vote Yes or No on something I didn't know about).
Can I put up bounties for features and then code them myself if some
institution gives money? Can I code features first but keep them to
myself untill somebody coughs up some dough?
Sure, why not? There is nothing to prevent you from doing these things
right now. I have openly said that if people give me a little money,
I'll put time into working on the distros. People have given me some
money to do just that, so I have put in a couple days recently. If I
got enough money to stop doing lame freelance jobs, I would happily
devote all that work time to Pd at a small fraction of the hour rate
that I charge businesses. This was, in effect, a bounty that I put up
and I collected. Or to put it another way, I offered my services, and
a few people took me up on that offer.
As for competition for the same patch/bounty, I don't think that we
should allow a developer to "mark" a bounty to prevent others from
working on it. If this was true, then someone could easily "mark" a
high paying bounty, and sit on it until they felt like working on it.
This would block other people from doing it without any They should
announce that they are working on it, then other developers can decide
for themselves whether its worthwhile to compete for the same bounty.
But in general, the idea would be that only one person should work on a
give feature/bounty at a time.
I think Tim is right, a marketplace is more what we are thinking for Pd
that bounties.
Bounties might work for something where there are only two or three
developers and the program has a more strict licence than pd.
Bounties work well for GNOME, which has more developers that Pd and is
GNU GPL. Besides Miller's Pd code, almost all of the rest of the Pd
code is released under the GNU GPL also.
Use the money to pay some developers to come install and lecture on
the stuff. Start a pd development group locally. Or commision somebody
for a piece of music or an installation or a piece of software. Or get
some funky hardware for the money. Sensors and stuff like that.
If you are going to use money to commission a piece of music or a talk,
why not commission a bugfix or a new feature?
.hc
The pd community is too loose for something really official. And I
personally like that.another 2 c
Gerard
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
"I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three
meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds,
and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits."
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
Hi Max,
An example comes to mind. The guys behind the Rosegarden software started a music oriented linux distro, http://www.ferventsoftware.com, as a way to finance their development of Rosegarden. Currently it doesn't include PD, but it's an example of how free software can be combined with a commercial offering.
But the most common way I suppose would be selling "support" (including implemented new custom features, etc). I guess all it would take in the case of PD is some company offering such support for PD.
I see the FSF has on webpage on the subject: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
maarten
On Tue, 17 May 2005 01:07:37 +0200 Max Neupert abonnements@revolwear.com wrote:
Hi list,
I'm curious to hear your point of view to this: the university asked me to review the list of software they want to order for the department. They've got also Max/MSP and Jitter on the list. This is a nice thing but my point is: the students already work with PD, why should they use and learn software they might not be able to afford after they leave the university? I guess you all agree that the money should rather be spent in PD development. but since there is no license to aquire the university can't ask companys to give bids on this deal. how can open source projects handle this? any suggestions?
--
Max Neupert Tutor im Fachgebiet Medienkunst Hochschule für Kunst und Design Burg Giebichenstein Halle, Deutschland
http://kunstundmedien.burg-halle.de
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Hello all,
At my University, we will donate to PureData next year, having a PayPal account on the IEM (I have not seen one) and other sites would make it easier. I am also working on documentation with students.
With artengine (not-for-profit, artist-run organization), we support PD and related efforts by presenting artworks and performances that make use of it, supporting specific projects (such as the iobox and parts of GridFlow) and offering workshops (next one starts on the 27th, Ben Bogart will present GEM and PixelTango, any takers ;-?).
I agree with Maarten about selling a PureData 'product'. An easy to install package coupled with support could bring in some funding. It would make it easier to justify giving money to free software while removing the stigmata of : 'it's free (of charge) it must be a lesser product than a commercial one'.
As I see it, such a product should be offered by a not-for-profit organisation that is :
- Incorporated so that there is an elected board of directors and it's
operations are completely open
- Financially transparent
Perhaps the IEM should be where such an organisation should be started/hosted, or maybe the just formed pd~graz Verein is it? Any such organisation would bring it's fair share of discussions and administration overhead. PayPal accounts do not get used a lot so maybe this is worth it.
Cheers,
Alexandre
On Tuesday 17 May 2005 06:48, Maarten de Boer wrote:
Hi Max,
An example comes to mind. The guys behind the Rosegarden software started a music oriented linux distro, http://www.ferventsoftware.com, as a way to finance their development of Rosegarden. Currently it doesn't include PD, but it's an example of how free software can be combined with a commercial offering.
But the most common way I suppose would be selling "support" (including implemented new custom features, etc). I guess all it would take in the case of PD is some company offering such support for PD.
I see the FSF has on webpage on the subject: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
maarten
On Tue, 17 May 2005 01:07:37 +0200
Max Neupert abonnements@revolwear.com wrote:
Hi list,
I'm curious to hear your point of view to this: the university asked me to review the list of software they want to order for the department. They've got also Max/MSP and Jitter on the list. This is a nice thing but my point is: the students already work with PD, why should they use and learn software they might not be able to afford after they leave the university? I guess you all agree that the money should rather be spent in PD development. but since there is no license to aquire the university can't ask companys to give bids on this deal. how can open source projects handle this? any suggestions?
--
Max Neupert Tutor im Fachgebiet Medienkunst Hochschule für Kunst und Design Burg Giebichenstein Halle, Deutschland
http://kunstundmedien.burg-halle.de
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
Alexandre Castonguay -
Arie van Schutterhoef -
B. Bogart -
Christian Klippel -
CK -
David Powers -
gerard van dongen -
g�nter geiger -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
Maarten de Boer -
Marc Lavallée -
Max Neupert -
Thomas Grill -
Thoralf Schulze -
Tim Blechmann