year end, already !

[David J Patrick]

Neil Williams wrote:

>On Sunday 27 March 2005 4:27 pm, David J Patrick wrote:
>  
>
>>Isn't it time gnuCash got a sugar-daddy ??
>>    
>>
>
>Personally, I'd say no. Making GnuCash into a commercial operation would not 
>get me producing a single line of extra code.
>
I'm not suggesting GnuCash go commercial, can't even imagine how that
might work !
Just wondering if having corporate backing (not control) might take some
pressure off and perhaps allow another handfull of developers to hack on
GnuCash full time.

> Why should paying the 
>developers magically produce more code?
>
Well a developer that has to work at Future Shop, 10 hours a day, to pay
his rent, would certainly produce /less/ code !

>However, if your idea was to get a sponsor to provide the *support* and take 
>at least some of that off Derek's shoulders, I could see that being 
>beneficial.
>  
>
that's the page I'm on.

>>but needs some husbanding.
>>    
>>
>
>Does it? It may need more development time but the leadership of the project 
>is not, IMHO, in need of any help.
>

      Transitive verb

*to husband*

   1. To conserve, to nurture, to farm.

I'm not talking about new leadership. GnuCash IS the current team.

>IMHO, money is neither the problem nor the solution to the RFE. Why do people 
>assume so?
>  
>
Because sometimes the RFE is just what the developer would like to do,
but he/she can only afford to spend a few hours a week on their "hobby".
Sometimes a paid professional can accomplish something, in a few hours,
that might not otherwise happen. Sometimes development is stalled for
lack of specific hardware or other resource.
djp