Difference between revisions of "MythTV Official Wiki:Site support"

From MythTV Official Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(reply to Ghee22)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
: For Myth, I assume you mean; not the site itself?  Not formally, that I'm aware of. --[[User:Baylink|Baylink]] 16:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 
: For Myth, I assume you mean; not the site itself?  Not formally, that I'm aware of. --[[User:Baylink|Baylink]] 16:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 +
 
: Yes, for Myth.  I think it's a great way to get MythTV out to the motto, ''a program for developers by developers'' and onto ''a program for sophisticated users by investors''. --[[User:Ghee22|Ghee22]] 10:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 
: Yes, for Myth.  I think it's a great way to get MythTV out to the motto, ''a program for developers by developers'' and onto ''a program for sophisticated users by investors''. --[[User:Ghee22|Ghee22]] 10:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 +
 
: There was a bounty system, run separately as the LXM Suite and launched last year. AFAIK it didn't attract any  real user money and their website is now dead. A couple of months back a $1000 bounty was offered on the Dev mailing list and was collected. However the real problem with a bounty system is that it wastes a lot of developer time and places greater pressure on them. They compete against each other, rather than working in harmony. Personally I would rather complete work in my own time, rather than race someone to the money and potentially throw that code away if I 'lost' -- GBee
 
: There was a bounty system, run separately as the LXM Suite and launched last year. AFAIK it didn't attract any  real user money and their website is now dead. A couple of months back a $1000 bounty was offered on the Dev mailing list and was collected. However the real problem with a bounty system is that it wastes a lot of developer time and places greater pressure on them. They compete against each other, rather than working in harmony. Personally I would rather complete work in my own time, rather than race someone to the money and potentially throw that code away if I 'lost' -- GBee
 +
 +
: and I concur with GBee; if someone wants to productize Myth, let them reach into their deep pockets, and hire someone to work on it doing their stuff (while respecting the licensing).  As to whether it "wastes" time, I think that depends on your goals, and everyones' are different.  If there's a specific thing ''you'' want, though, read the devlist, figure out which developer to bribe, and then write them offlist and ask them what their price is.  That'd be *my* approach, anyway.  :-) --[[User:Baylink|Baylink]] 21:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:24, 8 February 2006

Is there a bounty system? - ghee22

For Myth, I assume you mean; not the site itself? Not formally, that I'm aware of. --Baylink 16:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes, for Myth. I think it's a great way to get MythTV out to the motto, a program for developers by developers and onto a program for sophisticated users by investors. --Ghee22 10:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
There was a bounty system, run separately as the LXM Suite and launched last year. AFAIK it didn't attract any real user money and their website is now dead. A couple of months back a $1000 bounty was offered on the Dev mailing list and was collected. However the real problem with a bounty system is that it wastes a lot of developer time and places greater pressure on them. They compete against each other, rather than working in harmony. Personally I would rather complete work in my own time, rather than race someone to the money and potentially throw that code away if I 'lost' -- GBee
and I concur with GBee; if someone wants to productize Myth, let them reach into their deep pockets, and hire someone to work on it doing their stuff (while respecting the licensing). As to whether it "wastes" time, I think that depends on your goals, and everyones' are different. If there's a specific thing you want, though, read the devlist, figure out which developer to bribe, and then write them offlist and ask them what their price is. That'd be *my* approach, anyway.  :-) --Baylink 21:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)