| 1 |
On 07/09/18 02:47, Richard Yao wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 9:01 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 8:32 PM Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> |
| 7 |
>>>>> On Sep 6, 2018, at 9:07 AM, Raymond Jennings <shentino@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 8 |
>>>>> |
| 9 |
>>>>> - Host a bug-bounty program. |
| 10 |
>>> This would need to be restricted to critical bugs. Otherwise, it would drain the foundation treasury very quickly. |
| 11 |
>> ++ |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>>> We also would need to restrict this to non-developers, again to avoid draining the treasury. |
| 14 |
>> Uh, how does it drain the treasury less if we pay the same amount of |
| 15 |
>> money to a non-dev vs a dev? Wouldn't that actually discourage |
| 16 |
>> regular contributors from becoming devs, and potentially drive us to |
| 17 |
>> have to pay for more bounties since less stuff is getting fixed for |
| 18 |
>> free? |
| 19 |
> Fair point. |
| 20 |
>> Bounties would have to be limited to what we really need and can |
| 21 |
>> afford, but once you've gotten that far then there is really no reason |
| 22 |
>> to restrict who can apply for them. The goal is to fix the bug, |
| 23 |
>> right? |
| 24 |
> I was concerned that people might end up getting paid for things that they would do anyway, but I guess if we are careful with what qualifies, then that would be okay. |
| 25 |
>> -- |
| 26 |
>> Rich |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
It would also be worth stipulating that any individual's 'bounty haul' |
| 30 |
would be capped at a certain amount in a defined time period. |
| 31 |
But these are relatively simple technical details .. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
MJE |
Archives