TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

GitHub Sponsors

2082 点作者 Heliosmaster将近 6 年前

92 条评论

Androider将近 6 年前
This is a nice start for allowing sending &quot;coffee money&quot; between persons. If however you want to drive Serious Money into actually funding OSS projects please remember this: While virtually no company has a donations budget, almost every company has a $$$ marketing budget.<p>Please let me give you some of that money that would otherwise be spent on blue pens with logos and endless display ads to GitHub projects. I&#x27;d be happy to drive $xxK&#x2F;mo to open source projects my company depends on or that are simply being used by an audience that aligns with our own. To sell that internally, I need (as in, I would be laughed out of the room to propose it without):<p>- My sponsoring company logo on the GitHub project page<p>- UTM links and all that jazz to attribute traffic and campaigns to the specific projects that we sponsor<p>See <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;webpack.js.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;webpack.js.org&#x2F;</a> for a good example of a successful sponsorship program. Literally the biggest hurdle remaining for BigCorp to sponsor something like Webpack today is selling your boss on &quot;Patreon&quot; and &quot;OpenCollective&quot;. But if you just increase our GitHub budget by a few K&#x2F;month, AND the marketers get attributable traffic to boot that we can point to, well that&#x27;s an easy sell!
评论 #19997695 未加载
评论 #19996589 未加载
评论 #19999433 未加载
评论 #19995795 未加载
评论 #19998926 未加载
评论 #20002955 未加载
评论 #19996278 未加载
评论 #19996674 未加载
mushufasa将近 6 年前
This seems like it&#x27;s needed and (dareisay) overdue?<p>Integrating sponsorship subscriptions into the core experience is sure to increase payments, a la twitch subscriptions&#x2F;payments (which Youtube is just now copying).<p>I imagine this will change the fundamental dynamics around OSS projects, but not sure how, nor whether it is all positive.<p>- If maintainers can see who donated, do they prioritize issues &#x2F; pull requests? (I think that could be a good thing actually).<p>- Do companies use GitHub sponsorships to judge the health of dependencies? Will they create budgets to support their dependencies systematically?<p>- Does this hurt FOSS contributions, because now people start to expect to be paid rather than doing it for inherent motivations? Will this generate toxic politics among project contributors regarding who gets credit + gets paid?<p>- Will this mean that microsoft gets a bunch of PII on top-notch developers (have to enter name + address info to receive or send payments), and get much more value from that data than I can imagine?
评论 #19989860 未加载
评论 #19991336 未加载
评论 #19992175 未加载
评论 #19990416 未加载
评论 #19992935 未加载
评论 #19995671 未加载
Sir_Cmpwn将近 6 年前
Really neat! As someone who works on open-source full time and is largely sponsored by my users, here&#x27;s my take:<p>The good:<p>- gets money into open source with an intuitive and accessible interface that will get it to the forefront of people&#x27;s minds<p>- they&#x27;re the only platform that isn&#x27;t taking a slice off the top (yet)<p>- (temporary) donation matching and eating payment processing fees<p>The bad:<p>- a few projects on github are disproportionately large and influential and will probably receive a majority of the funds from this<p>- this risks creating a stronger form of platform lock-in than ever: who&#x27;s going to switch to sourcehut when their github repo makes them real world money?<p>I find this interesting because it runs into a place where my interests are seriously split. I depend on funding for my open source projects and this seems like a really necessary and powerful move that fills a gaping hole in the ecosystem, and might do it really well. At the same time, I&#x27;m working on a competing platform to GitHub and I&#x27;m worried about getting people locked into a proprietary platform. I have always recommended that people who accept donations for their open-source work avoid putting all of their eggs into one basket, like Patreon, in case that platform changes in a way they dislike. I encourage that for anyone interested in this GitHub offering as well, and I signed up for the waitlist to see how it goes. I still keep a number of projects there and will for the foreseeable future, so it might be a nice revenue source.<p>I have put a lot of thought into open source funding in general, I&#x27;d love to sit down with the team and chat if they have the time. Shoot me an email: sir@cmpwn.com.
评论 #19997093 未加载
评论 #19993572 未加载
评论 #20002302 未加载
buro9将近 6 年前
I run community sites for which I am paid donations to cover running costs including writing code, bug fixes, servers, etc.<p>Today I take donations via PayPal, but the catch with this is that it&#x27;s hard to provide visibility to donors of how healthy this is (WRT to costs), and whilst I considered Patreon that seemed to be very focused on creative deliverables to donors of a non-code&#x2F;service nature.<p>I am trying Browser Attention Tokens, but these feel to be detached from the delivery of code, and still don&#x27;t provide enough visibility to the donors of the overall health of the projects.<p>This though... this could be good. If Github sponsorship were attached to projects and people donated to a given org or repo, and then that were visible &quot;this repo receives $500 per month&quot; it would encourage code contribution whilst providing visibility over the health of a project.<p>I know my donors would appreciate the visibility (as would I, I manually create periodic reports on income and costs - at least this solves the income side).<p>The only question I have is how easy it would be for those who don&#x27;t use Github to subscribe to a recurring donation?<p>Edit: Signed up for the waitlist, received a link to <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;help.github.com&#x2F;en&#x2F;articles&#x2F;about-github-sponsors" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;help.github.com&#x2F;en&#x2F;articles&#x2F;about-github-sponsors</a> which appears to clarify that you&#x27;d be sponsoring a developer not a repo&#x2F;org... which means popularity&#x2F;celebrity is everything. Oh well.
评论 #19990751 未加载
评论 #19990407 未加载
评论 #19989908 未加载
评论 #19990351 未加载
amirathi将近 6 年前
To summarize,<p>- OSS contributors on GitHub can apply to become &quot;sponsored developer&quot; to accept donations<p>- Developer sets monthly sponsorship tiers (amounts &amp; benefits)<p>- GitHub will match upto $5k in donation in Developer&#x27;s first year (1:1 match)<p>- GitHub will not charge any fees in the first year<p>- In the future, they may charge a nominal processing fee<p>- Currently only individuals can donate to individuals, org&#x2F;team support (on both sides) to come soon
xwdv将近 6 年前
I don’t like this. There has always been a purity around writing open source software simply for the benefit of mankind.<p>Let’s not kid ourselves, probably no one is going to make a living from github sponsors, and projects that bring in any significant money are probably written by developers who already make good money do something else anyway. This would basically be beer money to them.<p>You would be amazed at how people that do not contribute any sort of money to an open source software project will come in and make <i>demands</i> to the creator to implement some feature or fix some bug. Now imagine if they donate $10 and suddenly feel like there is a <i>debt</i> the creator must pay to them by doing what they want.<p>I will not be using github sponsors for my open source projects. Instead I will continue to ask for things like tickets to conferences or speaking engagements where I can better develop my brand and clout. That’s the way it should be, but that’s just my opinion.
评论 #19993000 未加载
评论 #19993379 未加载
评论 #19992474 未加载
评论 #19992462 未加载
评论 #19998639 未加载
评论 #19997324 未加载
usrusr将近 6 年前
I think it&#x27;s a very compelling deal: under the patreon model (company takes a cut to fund the funding mechanism), the &quot;platform tax&quot; is a permanent sore that makes donating feel less good than it could. Am I giving to the cause or am I giving to the platform? An independent zero fee platform run entirely on altruism will always be in the edge of failure, with one of the failure modes being transfer to untrustworthy operators.<p>A commercial zero fee platform run as a loss leader on a perfectly obvious business case just makes sense. It&#x27;s clear that both ends of the transaction &quot;pay&quot; by adding relevance to the platform, but that&#x27;s a positive sum game.
评论 #19990620 未加载
评论 #19991456 未加载
zapita将近 6 年前
I’m glad open-source maintainers will get one more way to get paid... But it feels wrong to lock this into a git hosting platform. Maintainer payment is important enough to be a first-class product, open and accessible to all... instead it’s being used as a bargaining chip to keep developers on a hosting platform. The subtext is pretty clear: “if you want to get paid, you better not leave Github!”.<p>Meanwhile nonprofits and startups focused on solving the problem of open-source sustainability for everyone, not just Github customers, will suffer from this announcement.<p>I think that’s a shame.
评论 #19991683 未加载
评论 #19991806 未加载
评论 #19992346 未加载
评论 #19990203 未加载
评论 #19991325 未加载
评论 #19991084 未加载
VikingCoder将近 6 年前
Awesome!<p>Some Feature Requests:<p>1) Let me sponsor a project, not a person<p>2) Let a project have a private, or a public, allocation of how funding goes. At first, simple percents would be awesome.<p>3) Let a project assign funding to another project. Probably one it depends on.<p>4) For a given project, let me see which other projects are funding it.<p>5) Allow the set up of Unions. These five projects all have one pool where all the money goes, which is then divided back to the projects by some percentage.<p>6) Fund a charity. If this person or project receives money, please directly send it to a specified charity instead. (Don&#x27;t make the person who receives the donation have to handle the paperwork for it.)<p>7) Try to make it easy to set up a sponsorship in your will<p>8) Let a project use their funding to pay for hosting, directly. So, I give to some project, they pay for CPU and Storage on some cloud host.<p>I&#x27;m certain there are legal complications with all of these ideas. If you solve the legal issues, that would be amazing. Cheers!
评论 #19995783 未加载
评论 #19998110 未加载
评论 #19995285 未加载
patcon将近 6 年前
This is NOT about helping us out, fellow maintainer-kids, it&#x27;s about owning the playground and burning the forest.<p>This fee structure is predatory af &amp; straight outta amazon&#x27;s playbook. (2x matching funds and all fees waived for first year?[1])<p>There has been an ecosystem. If this was about anything except market capture through burning VC&#x2F;reserve funding, GitHub would have engaged in existing nacent and experimental spaces. They haven&#x27;t: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;opencollective.com&#x2F;github" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;opencollective.com&#x2F;github</a><p>If a company is truly trying to be embody open culture, they support and and-yes existing projects as step 1. Case in point: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;words.steveklabnik.com&#x2F;why-im-partnering-with-balanced" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;words.steveklabnik.com&#x2F;why-im-partnering-with-balanc...</a><p>If we have a problem or idea for OpenCollective&#x2F;Liberapay&#x2F;etc, the staff live on open chat rooms -- the github issue queues are public -- the code is interrogable by the curious and adventurous. With GitHub, we get bupkis. Or wait, we get coaxed into a one-on-one email support channel where we can&#x27;t see one another, speak together, nor find fellow travellers. Or we get the unofficial wailing wall that is <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;isaacs&#x2F;github" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;isaacs&#x2F;github</a><p>Really disappointed in the lack of critical reflection from technologists. This is not good for us as executed.<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;help.github.com&#x2F;en&#x2F;articles&#x2F;about-github-sponsors#about-the-github-sponsors-matching-fund" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;help.github.com&#x2F;en&#x2F;articles&#x2F;about-github-sponsors#ab...</a>
评论 #19993041 未加载
评论 #19993138 未加载
评论 #19992917 未加载
AceJohnny2将近 6 年前
Dan Ariely&#x27;s 2008 book &quot;Predictably Irrational&quot; [1], which presents experiments in behavioral economics, has one chapter [2] that discusses the introduction of money (&quot;market norms&quot;) in an otherwise money-free social context, typically of favors being exchanged (&quot;social norms&quot;)<p>To summarize, the introduction of hard currency completely disrupts the social dynamics and the resulting work quality, usually for the worst.<p>You can find an more in-depth summary in the links:<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Predictably_Irrational" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Predictably_Irrational</a><p>[2] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;bookoutlines.pbworks.com&#x2F;w&#x2F;page&#x2F;14422685&#x2F;Predictably%20Irrational" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;bookoutlines.pbworks.com&#x2F;w&#x2F;page&#x2F;14422685&#x2F;Predictably%...</a> &quot;Chapter 4: The Cost of Social Norms&quot;
评论 #19996411 未加载
devonzuegel将近 6 年前
Hi, I’m Devon the product manager behind GitHub Sponsors. We’re excited to launch the beta program today and learn how we can best serve the community.<p>It’s great to already see the conversation on this thread! We’re eager to hear all of your feedback, and feel free to email me at devonzuegel@github.com as well.
评论 #19991809 未加载
评论 #19991423 未加载
评论 #19991604 未加载
评论 #19993012 未加载
评论 #19991796 未加载
评论 #19992206 未加载
评论 #19991575 未加载
评论 #19991860 未加载
评论 #19992864 未加载
nstart将近 6 年前
I love this. I do wonder though if anyone can educate me on the choice to do a monthly sponsorship? I think that&#x27;s awesome but at the same time, there are a lot of developers I want to send 10 dollar tips to for that library that they made.<p>Just wondering if there&#x27;s a reason to not have both. My guess is that foregoing one time transactions in favour of ensuring that people gravitate towards making a more sustainable donation seemed like a rational choice. Pure speculation there so if there&#x27;s any other reason why it wasn&#x27;t done I&#x27;d be really grateful if anyone from Github might be able to share.
评论 #19989830 未加载
评论 #19989897 未加载
评论 #19989806 未加载
评论 #19991281 未加载
评论 #19990395 未加载
评论 #19989849 未加载
seren将近 6 年前
A logical next step would be to add bounty on specific bugs or features requests.<p>If a company is relying on open source, and has no capability to fix a critical bug (which is a bad strategy but it certainly happens), it would probably be ready to pay a hefty sum so that the maintainer, or anyone involved in the project, will have at least a look at it.<p>Today, unless you can contact directly the maintainer and hope he or she has some spare time, I don&#x27;t know how you can solve that kind of issue.<p>However, I am not sure who will decide a bug is fixed or a feature properly implemented.
评论 #19989807 未加载
评论 #19994245 未加载
评论 #19991094 未加载
评论 #19994955 未加载
marktani将近 6 年前
I support one project on Open Collective [1] on a monthly basis. They do take a cut from the money I donate to cover the credit card fees and their operational costs. GitHub Support does not take any fees and even matches donations... wow!<p>While this news sounds amazing on the surface, I am also concerned it might have negative effects on the OSS ecosystem overall. Let&#x27;s see how this pans out!<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;opencollective.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;opencollective.com&#x2F;</a>
评论 #19990221 未加载
评论 #20009680 未加载
koolba将近 6 年前
&gt; To supercharge community funding, GitHub created the GitHub Sponsors Matching Fund, which matches up to $5000 per sponsored developer in their first year of sponsorship. In the first year, GitHub will not charge any fees, so 100% of sponsorships will go to the sponsored developer. In the future, we may charge a nominal processing fee.<p>What&#x27;s to stop me^Wsomeone else and their friend from sponsoring each other for $5K to collect the $5K in matching funds?
评论 #19991425 未加载
评论 #19991430 未加载
评论 #19991416 未加载
评论 #19994033 未加载
评论 #19991374 未加载
评论 #19992661 未加载
SquishyPanda23将近 6 年前
I have been curious for a while what Microsoft plans for LinkedIn and GitHub.<p>It seems like one possible future here is that open source becomes less like passion projects that scratch an itch and more like driving for Uber.<p>Maybe that is good. Maybe GitHub just took a step toward becoming Fiverr. I really don&#x27;t know.
评论 #19993156 未加载
评论 #19991763 未加载
raphlinus将近 6 年前
I am cautiously optimistic about this. I recently built a prototype GPU-based 2D renderer which I think has huge potential, but obviously also needs quite a bit of work to become a real product. I&#x27;ve been considering various kinds of hybrid open source business models, where there&#x27;s a free part but also parts people pay for. I&#x27;m pretty sure that can fly, but I&#x27;m also hesitating at the idea of spending a huge amount of my time and energy on building a business - I want to concentrate on the tech itself. If I can get close to paying cost of living through sponsorship, that&#x27;s pretty appealing.<p>For this to really fly, though, needs to come revenue streams from businesses who depend on open source, rather than other individuals. I&#x27;m hopeful this can get there.
kodablah将近 6 年前
This is such a watershed moment in the history of software development that I don&#x27;t think most of us can grasp its significance yet. Sure we&#x27;re familiar with other services that do the same, but the adoption rate (like for GH itself) will be clearly different.<p>One could argue that this is more societally important than YouTube, Twitch, etc funded content for _consuming_ because this funds content for _leveraging_ to build&#x2F;work on top of. And this is not just limited to the entrepreneurial devs out there, of which &quot;the man&quot; has new employment competition with now. It can also fund entire company departments.<p>I look forward to mass adoption of this, wallet in hand.
评论 #19993931 未加载
评论 #19991618 未加载
评论 #19992899 未加载
评论 #19993890 未加载
评论 #19992514 未加载
评论 #19993638 未加载
hp将近 6 年前
Just wanted to add here for those interested in this kind of thing, that we have over 4000 packages with income maintainers can claim today on Tidelift.<p>If you&#x27;re a maintainer, ctrl-f through this list and see if you&#x27;re in there: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.tidelift.com&#x2F;is-your-package-eligible-for-income-on-tidelift-heres-the-complete-list-may-2019" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.tidelift.com&#x2F;is-your-package-eligible-for-incom...</a><p>Tidelift is also supported via the new GitHub Sponsors feature: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;tidelift.com&#x2F;subscription&#x2F;how-to-connect-tidelift-with-github" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;tidelift.com&#x2F;subscription&#x2F;how-to-connect-tidelift-wi...</a><p>If you aren&#x27;t in the 4000+ packages we have income for now, you can still sign up (which helps us get to subscribers who are specifically using your stuff, meaning income in the future).
bluefox将近 6 年前
Prior to sponsors, you developed that project for the fun of it. It was useful to some, so you gave this sponsorship thing a try. It was a success, maybe not a great success, but still. Now that you have sponsors, you feel somewhat obligated, but still not on the level of that &quot;professional software industry&quot; that destroyed so much about programming for you.<p>Time passes, and at some point it becomes clear that sponsors don&#x27;t have infinite resources, and at some point some of them take their money and leave. It lingers in the back of your head, but you continue development. You notice however, that your motivation lessens, especially for that particular project people care about. You decide that you want to move on.<p>Many of the remaining sponsors don&#x27;t take it well and back away. Now you feel that there&#x27;s no point to even work on something else. Your soft income is nil. You remember the days you worked that software job. Back then, you managed to write a bit of code, push to a GitHub public repository, and be content that programming was not just a profession to you. Now, you don&#x27;t even have that.<p>You look around. There are sponsored celebrities, political cases where sponsors withdrew en-masse because of some controversy, and the usual monetary disputes. Having GitHub sponsors has become yet another status signal for potential employers or clients, and it&#x27;s another a standard goodie to have them, by contract, transfer a small sum that way every month. Sickened, you turn back to your own issues.<p>You decide not to let Microsoft poke bytes in your Incentive Unit that way. An optimist, you assure yourself that in a few months you&#x27;ll repair yourself and be able to write some code again, this time Free Software, since you well know what Open Source means, what it always meant. The GitHub demon is no longer an option. No big deal, since it&#x27;s also become more like a &quot;social network for developers&quot; with status lines and people using their legal names and professionalism all over it. GitLab still requires JavaScript to view source code, so that&#x27;s DOA, what with you having your default browser running with JavaScript disabled (the Internet went to shit a long time ago).<p>So you consider setting up some private GitHub-like that&#x27;s actually accessible on your own server, or maybe use that FSF hosting site. You learned your lesson, but the software world took yet another step towards the void.
评论 #19995652 未加载
评论 #19995926 未加载
评论 #20001989 未加载
euph0ria将近 6 年前
Great feature! Something to consider for the feature which would allow us to donate more is: 1) Sponsor a project rather an individual developer 2) Sponsor a specific issue&#x2F;bug
评论 #19990930 未加载
diggan将近 6 年前
Ugh, not again! First they introduce a Package Registry that not only splits the ecosystem in two parts but also has no open governance or even open source code. Great. Now they are doing the same thing with donations. Instead of collaborating with already open platforms (like OpenCollective or LiberaPay), they decide to build their own closed-source platform.<p>I love that more people are figuring out ways to pay open source developers, but doing it via a closed-source platform they developed on their own, they are effectively saying they don&#x27;t care about &quot;open development&quot;, they just want to be the one-stop for everything open source as to not lose mind-share of developers.<p>I&#x27;d be wary of joining this program and I urge people to get involved with something like OpenCollective instead, which is a open project you can actually contribute to. It also helps that OpenCollective&#x27;s success is based on it&#x27;s members success. &quot;GitHub Sponsors&quot; isn&#x27;t as well aligned with you as a developer, as OpenCollective et al.<p>Obviously, I&#x27;m a bit biased, as I run a project for creating transparent open source infrastructure. But I do think this is a important issue, and I&#x27;m getting more and more scared GitHub is out to make open source development more ivory tower-like.
评论 #19990288 未加载
评论 #19990154 未加载
评论 #19990065 未加载
评论 #19990802 未加载
评论 #19990092 未加载
评论 #19992847 未加载
评论 #19992821 未加载
评论 #19990484 未加载
评论 #19990090 未加载
评论 #19990129 未加载
评论 #19990314 未加载
wincent将近 6 年前
Is there any way I could add a button to my projects that would route &quot;sponsorship&quot; to a charity? Because I have a full time job, I do open source for fun, and I want to keep it that way — taking sponsorship would make that harder. But it would feel great to know that anything people wanted to put in the tip jar went straight to a non-profit.<p>Edit: answering my own question, their help page — <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;help.github.com&#x2F;en&#x2F;articles&#x2F;displaying-a-sponsor-button-in-your-repository" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;help.github.com&#x2F;en&#x2F;articles&#x2F;displaying-a-sponsor-but...</a> — says &quot;We don’t support the use of funding links for other purposes, such as for advertising, or supporting political, community, or charity groups.&quot;
dsumenkovic将近 6 年前
Great news! I hope this will enhance the development of many great open source projects.<p>This has already been discussed at GitLab and it would be nice if something similar is implemented on other platforms as well. Here&#x27;s the issue with more details <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ce&#x2F;issues&#x2F;43468" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitlab.com&#x2F;gitlab-org&#x2F;gitlab-ce&#x2F;issues&#x2F;43468</a>
kabacha将近 6 年前
I was really expecting GitLab to double down on features like this to attract floss community, but this coming from now Microsoft&#x27;s GitHub is trully surprising. I hope GitHub is working on some more social features as I feel like bringing back my project to GitHub more and more these days.<p>That being I think it&#x27;s a great idea as we had many of bounty&#x2F;subscription tools but they always fail to get adopted and in general lack proper integrations with projects itself. Bounty integration in issue tracker has been on my wishlist forever now, can we get that going next?
rdl将近 6 年前
This is great; it&#x27;s basically either 1) an alternative to Patreon for developers (which is something I have always wanted to exist) or 2) an alternative to Patreon for Patreon creators who are the tiniest bit intelligent and able to actually use GitHub (every aspect of Patreon is bad for creators, so this is an upgrade, except in user reach).<p>The missing element here is a nice end-user focused browsing experience, layered on top. A user-focused portal which lets you subscribe to projects, sponsor them on GitHub, and see updates, with GitHub behind the scenes.
评论 #19991548 未加载
andrewstuart将近 6 年前
Sponsorships and donations don&#x27;t work in any substantial way because they are optional.<p>What might work is &quot;KeepAlive&quot; subscriptions, where companies pay substantive amount of money monthly to keep projects that they depend on alive.<p>KeepAlive payments are about corporate self interest - ensuring that the projects they depend on aren&#x27;t abandoned.<p>The secret to success is naming.<p>Calling it &quot;KeepAlive&quot; subscriptions conveys the self interest, and connects the potential death of the project to your need for it to be healthy because you&#x27;ve built it into your systems.<p>Naming payments to open source projects as &quot;Sponsorships&quot; or &quot;Donations&quot; leads to the expected outcome - a trivial trickle of money.<p>The payment amounts must be predefined and set high too - $200 - $500&#x2F;month for small businesses $500-$5000 &#x2F; month for medium and large business. It&#x27;s critically important not to leave the amount to the &quot;purchaser&quot; - that&#x27;s when you get payments of $1&#x2F;month which is what happens on Patreon.
hdv011将近 6 年前
What&#x27;s stopping me creating a sponsored project and donating myself $5,000 to get a free $5,000?
评论 #19989842 未加载
评论 #19989837 未加载
评论 #19989862 未加载
caniszczyk将近 6 年前
cool feature but putting the burden of funding on individuals vs companies is supporting what I call the &quot;open source gig economy&quot; - doesn&#x27;t work well for Patreon and others - we need better ways to sustain individuals who choose not start their own company around open source projects or work full time at a company supporting open source<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.aniszczyk.org&#x2F;2019&#x2F;03&#x2F;25&#x2F;troubles-with-the-open-source-gig-economy-and-sustainability-tip-jar&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.aniszczyk.org&#x2F;2019&#x2F;03&#x2F;25&#x2F;troubles-with-the-open-...</a>
评论 #19989733 未加载
评论 #19989760 未加载
NKCSS将近 6 年前
I&#x27;d be tempted to sign up and just donate $5k to myself to get the 100% match.... #freemoney
评论 #19991208 未加载
gowthamgts12将近 6 年前
A one time contribution would be great - since I personally cannot afford sponsoring monthly.
评论 #19991377 未加载
beager将近 6 年前
I’m excited about this but fearful that it will create unfair (I.e. monetary) incentive structures for FOSS maintenance.
评论 #19991911 未加载
throwaway_7718将近 6 年前
Say a sponsored developer Bob has some software, that another person, Alice forks. The fork becomes wildly more successful than the original for some reason, and Bob loses many sponsors in the course of time. Would a situation like this force developers to use restrictive licenses? (I get that Bob can just integrate Alice&#x27;s fork into his original - assume that it&#x27;s too much work for Bob to do so)
评论 #19990731 未加载
评论 #19992436 未加载
asdkhadsj将近 6 年前
Well damn, this is sneaky and I love it. I say sneaky, because I was in a situation where I mentally debated Github vs Gitlab. This tips it a bit towards Githubs favor. Not that I&#x27;m even planning on being sponsored or w&#x2F;e, but simply that I already view GH as a social network for a thing I love (code), but now it seems even more.. socially.. if that makes sense.<p>Purely my perception of course.
评论 #19992684 未加载
bshipp将近 6 年前
Hi Devon, I think this is a great idea.<p>speaking as someone working for a small company with the ability to sponsor projects of interest, could you evaluate the possibility of assigning rewards to specific milestones? for example, if I&#x27;m using a particular FOSS library and see that the maintainer has set up certain functionality as a long-term milestone could I attach a sort of carrot to a particular milestone to provide incentive to continue development?<p>This would be in conjunction with standard sponsorship, of course. But, for some developers, it&#x27;s easier to find the motivation to complete a task if there is a defined reward waiting at the end of it.<p>it doesn&#x27;t even have to be new functionality; it could simply be implementing a testing protocol to meet internal corporate requirements, or reorganizing old code to fit new standards; stuff that&#x27;s necessary but boring and shoved to the bottom of the pile for a hobby project. This might really open up the corporate pursestrings instead of relying on individual contributions.
TBF-RnD将近 6 年前
Being a full time open source independent research in an extremely tight financial spot, due to my cursed idealism, what means of surival are there for someone who can&#x27;t stop working on my obsession?<p>I am an honest to God searcher of the truth, so I&#x27;d hate to turn this into a commercial project. Also getting a job would be a highway to a psychiatric hospital due to being overworked. Done that multiple times and wouldn&#x27;t wish it upon my worst enemy,<p>Anybody have experience on how to make this lifestyle work, or do I have to give up on my dreams and get into to the line as the rest?<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;tbf-rnd.life" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;tbf-rnd.life</a> <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;sigma.eruditenow.com" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;sigma.eruditenow.com</a><p>* had I been the kind of person who have enemies
alphast0rm将近 6 年前
If I click on any of the actual sponsor buttons it redirects to <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;users&#x2F;$user&#x2F;sponsorship" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;users&#x2F;$user&#x2F;sponsorship</a> and 404&#x27;s. Happening for anybody else?
评论 #19989961 未加载
wonjohnchoi将近 6 年前
&gt; To boost community funding, we&#x27;ll match contributions up to $5,000 during a developer’s first year in GitHub Sponsors with the GitHub Sponsors Matching Fund.<p>How will GitHub deal with bad actors who might create a project and donate $5,000 to himself to get free money?
nautilus12将近 6 年前
Could this end up in commodotizing software engineering so much that it will drive the prices of software engineering down even further? How long till we are like panhandlers on the street throwing code at people in exchange for lunch money?
mherrmann将近 6 年前
Would be cool if there was an easy way to sponsor all the projects I&#x27;ve starred. Then I could just pay (say) $10 per month to &quot;support open source&quot;, without having to worry about any of the details such as picking projects.
dessant将近 6 年前
This is the best thing to have happened to open source since GitHub has launched. Thank you to whomever has internally pushed for it!
nickjj将近 6 年前
It&#x27;s an interesting idea but I wonder what will make this different than gittip from years ago, or gratipay, or Patreon, or just having a &quot;donate&quot; button in your README file.<p>I guess I&#x27;m just skeptical in that this will change anything for the developers who are trying to make some type of income for their contributions.<p>On a related note, DHH recorded a very nice keynote at Railsconf 2019 on expectations of payments in open source: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=VBwWbFpkltg" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=VBwWbFpkltg</a>
gigatexal将近 6 年前
Leave it to Microsoft to finally figure out a way to get people and more importantly businesses to fund OSS work.
评论 #19990898 未加载
评论 #19989865 未加载
sequoia将近 6 年前
Geez... it must be hard for other payment processors to compete with Github&#x2F;MSFT&#x27;s &quot;give away free money&quot; offering. :&#x2F; I guess all is fair in love &amp; war (and Uber does the same, losing money to kill competition) but this sort of behaviour sure seems innovation-killing and massively entrenched-big-corp-player-favouring.<p>This seems to go beyond killing competitors by offering their product for free, because in this case they&#x27;re actually paying users cash to use their platform.
thosakwe将近 6 年前
This is a game changer for people like me, who do a lot of open source work, but might not have the pockets to sustainably continue putting in so many hours each week (i.e. students).
thinkingemote将近 6 年前
This is also about making developers behave.<p>If you want to get paid on GitHub you shouldn&#x27;t commit anything controversial and you have to behave on the site. If they go full Twitch then they could take into consideration your actions outside the site. including posts on social media or at conferences.<p>So we would first see those wikileak dumps, code leaks and vulnerability repos being got rid of first, then we might see right wing bloggers who code being denied monetisation. Who wants to see Nazis get funded? Or even perhaps if your code still uses slave and master and you won&#x27;t change then maybe repos can&#x27;t be sponsored.<p>With monetization comes control. Opaque rules and decisions and no consistency. It won&#x27;t come in the first year but it will come soon enough after developers are fully invested into using it for their livelihoods.
评论 #19991687 未加载
buremba将近 6 年前
This might be a deal-breaker not only from the developers&#x27; side but also from the business side. If the companies see that a project is well-funded, they can invest their time (maybe their money also?) more confidently. It might become a real marketplace at some point and let (some of the) open-source businesses to focus on their project rather than starting a company and dealing with boring business work.
nojvek将近 6 年前
This is real nice to see. I Sponsor hzoo through patreon but may do it through GitHub sponsors. Babel is a great project.<p>What i’d really love to see is GitHub bounties though. Like you want a feature bad or a bug fixed because you depend on it. You can assign it some monetary value. GitHub is the escrow. When the bug&#x2F;feature is done and verified by people who put the bounty, it gets paid out to the implementors.
dredmorbius将近 6 年前
Joey Hess raises questions: &quot;What I would ask my lawyers about the new Github TOS&#x27;<p><i>If I were looking over the TOS with my lawyers, I&#x27;d ask these questions...</i><p><i>4 License Grant to Us</i><p><i>This seems to be saying that I&#x27;m granting an additional license to my software to Github. Is that right or does &quot;license grant&quot; have some other legal meaning?</i><p><i>If the Free Software license I&#x27;ve already licensed my software under allows for everything in this &quot;License Grant to Us&quot;, would that be sufficient, or would my software still be licenced under two different licences?</i><p><i>There are violations of the GPL that can revoke someone&#x27;s access to software under that license. Suppose that Github took such an action with my software, and their GPL license was revoked. Would they still have a license to my software under this &quot;License Grant to Us&quot; or not?....</i><p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;joeyh.name&#x2F;blog&#x2F;entry&#x2F;what_I_would_ask_my_lawyers_about_the_new_Github_TOS&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;joeyh.name&#x2F;blog&#x2F;entry&#x2F;what_I_would_ask_my_lawyers_abo...</a>
rewq4321将近 6 年前
I get that some people are concerned about github strengthening its monopoly here, but that shouldn&#x27;t be solved by preventing or opposing the improvement of the platform. There&#x27;s a sense in which it&#x27;s like opposing Tesla improving its autopilot tech because it further entrenches them as the leader in the electric car market - or whatever - you get the idea. Monopolies can lead to very bad outcomes for society, but we probably need to handle that by some means other than attacking improvements to the platform.<p>This comment of course assumes that you think that it is actually an improvement. It does seem like there is a risk of hurting the &quot;spirit&quot; of open source, but then you&#x27;d have to hold the position that things like librepay&#x2F;opencollective&#x2F;patreon are bad for open source, which at least makes the claim a little dubious. I don&#x27;t have strong predictions here, but if I had to gamble I&#x27;d say that lowing the friction to rewarding content producers (of any sort) is going to be a good think more often than not.
always4getpass将近 6 年前
While seemingly good news and will definitely have positive side effects to open source projects, I cannot stop myself from questioning if this is just good old Microsoft using one of its edges over Gitlab (money) to come on top.<p>After all, this is the embrace, extend, and extinguish company.<p>Anyhow, I&#x27;m looking forward to see a similar feature implemented by Gitlab, even without the matching donations.
评论 #19990826 未加载
评论 #19990039 未加载
joshfraser将近 6 年前
The best part of open-source is that draws in people who are focused on long-term benefits instead of short-term profit. Contributing to open-source projects teaches you how to write better code, how to work well with other developers and how to communicate your ideas effectively. It also gives you a network of other super smart people who can open all sorts of doors for you once you earn their respect.<p>Money is a funny thing. Introducing money into something that you were previously doing out of passion completely changes the dynamic. Take sex for example.<p>I like that Github Sponsors seems to be focused on supporting the developer for their ongoing efforts instead of being too transactional. Other companies have tried incentivizing specific features or bug fixes but they tend to draw in mercenaries who do the bare minimum to get the reward. This seems like a much better way to go.<p>I&#x27;m impressed by the way Github are rolling this out. It will be interesting to watch how it changes the nature of open-source.
thrownaway954将近 6 年前
this would a slam dunk if you could sponsor projects or organizations besides just developers. if that happened, this would destroy patreon and paypal in the donation space for OSS projects.
评论 #19991146 未加载
Toine将近 6 年前
From the signup page :<p>&gt; What are your preferred pronouns? (optional)<p>So this is actually happening ?
评论 #19990516 未加载
评论 #19991385 未加载
评论 #19991645 未加载
issuehuntcoo将近 6 年前
Great to see GitHub is finally introducing a direct way to support OSS developers.<p>Try IssueHunt (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;issuehunt.io&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;issuehunt.io&#x2F;</a>) as well! A open-source bounty platform for open source. Great place for open source developers to earn extra cash!
os7borne将近 6 年前
Wow! Long overdue. I&#x27;m not capable enough to contribute technically to the open source projects which I use. This will be a great way for me to make my contribution.<p>Also, I do believe this is a plus for open source projects that often find it tough to stay afloat because of financial constraints.
discordance将近 6 年前
@Github&#x2F;Microsoft feature request:<p>It would be nice to see sponsorship or bounties for individual issues in Github.
sktrdie将近 6 年前
Sorry to bring my ethical and philosophical view on the subject but I don&#x27;t agree with forcing a capitalist system to something that is essentially volunteer work.<p>Open source has worked fine being just volunteer for the past several decades. In fact I&#x27;d argue it&#x27;s one of the only ecosystem that keeps on being awesome. I don&#x27;t think adding money to the equation will change any of this. In fact it might risk making it worst.
评论 #19991042 未加载
评论 #19990694 未加载
评论 #19992701 未加载
benjaminsuch将近 6 年前
I love this. It&#x27;s actually huge, but I wonder why you have to apply for a waitlist in order to be able to get sponsored? Why wouldn&#x27;t we be allowed to sponsor anyone? I suppose it has something to do to prevent money laundry?
评论 #19989797 未加载
评论 #19989787 未加载
gilbetron将近 6 年前
I wonder if this will create pressure to consolidate projects - there might be a non-linearity in the perception of project value. Two tiny repos may seem worth X each, but combined they may seem large enough to generate &gt; 2X.
cosmodisk将近 6 年前
I very much doubt it will work..for the devs..Developers are a special category of people,who like to earn a lot at their day job,yet tirelessly praise open source and try their best not to pay for anything.The best example of this is vue.js,which is extremely popular and used by thousands of people.The creator and main contributor is accepting Patreon, corporate sponsorship and etc.Go on his Patreon account and see how much he&#x27;s pulling in.If that&#x27;s the money for one of the most popular projects in JS ecosystem, the rest of the guys will be making $100&#x2F;month..
kradroy将近 6 年前
I think this is a bad development. The allure of getting paid for something you do for free can be too great. This may lead to OSS devs, especially those who do the work for free now, expecting extrinsic reward for their work. Extrinsic reward for work that once provided intrinsic reward can lead to cessation of that work, if the external reward lessens or goes away. A new type of dev may emerge from this who won&#x27;t have the same values as the ones who do it free of charge.<p>I can see this support feature changing things, but it won&#x27;t in the way you suspect it will.
评论 #19994018 未加载
nullc将近 6 年前
Many projects that have had contributor sponsorship efforts in the past have had negative experiences with it, due to contributors showing up motivated by farming the payments with minimal investment.<p>In my experience sponsorship that isn&#x27;t at a level that can sustain a developer at least at an ongoing significant part time level often ends up being toxic-- pulling in the worst outcomes from funding it (changing motivations to being dollar driven, bringing in low effort farming contributions) without bringing most of the positive outcomes.<p>I really hope that this is handled carefully.
pkamb将近 6 年前
I&#x27;d still like a product for putting putting bounties on small individual scripts &#x2F; functions &#x2F; pieces of code.<p>Kind of a payment system on top of Stack Overflow or Github Gists; less-so a competitor to Upwork.<p>I don&#x27;t want the overhead of &quot;hiring a freelancer&quot; to do the work. But I&#x27;d definitely pay a bounty if someone came in with the answer &#x2F; script &#x2F; extension &#x2F; app that solved the problem.<p>previous: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=14554542" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=14554542</a>
rswail将近 6 年前
As I&#x27;ve read the comments here, I&#x27;ve realized that I really don&#x27;t like the idea.<p>This puts: a) A lot of power into the control of Github b) changes the entire incentive model for FOSS development c) devalues the aspects of a &quot;sharing economy&quot; and &quot;co-opetition&quot; that FOSS has grown.<p>My question: Will a sponsored person be able to see who has donated to them? That should be kept anonymous. Otherwise people will be able to &quot;buy&quot; the feature they want over others. Community interests will be lost.
评论 #19992742 未加载
评论 #19992761 未加载
pbhjpbhj将近 6 年前
It would be interesting to see if most of the people who are cautious&#x2F;guarded&#x2F;hostile about this are older people who&#x27;ve seen Microsoft work their &quot;magic&quot; before.
0xADEADBEE将近 6 年前
It&#x27;s interesting to see the gradual monetization of Open Source. 10 years ago this was just something you did for fun but with the proliferation of services charging for it, the landscape is shifting rapidly. Github are moving in some interesting directions and it&#x27;ll be interesting to see if they can stay ahead of the competition with how trivial it is to migrate to a rival. I wouldn&#x27;t bet on them personally but it&#x27;ll be fun to watch either way!
评论 #19991011 未加载
return1将近 6 年前
They should also launch one-off contributions for people who want particular features . Still a great move , and loooong overdue, i hope it succeeds massively.
dawhizkid将近 6 年前
It looks like you sponsor an individual and not necessarily an entire project. I get that it is wayyy less complex to build that MVP, but I wonder how project dynamics will change if you have a team of, say, 3 core contributors that are in actuality dividing work fairly evenly but one contributor is for some reason getting 50%, 100%, 200%+ more in contributions than another contributor.
ElijahLynn将近 6 年前
$1 is the lowest amount I have seen by clicking the big blue &quot;Start Sponsoring&quot; button and then making it to <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;users&#x2F;dominikh&#x2F;sponsorship" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;users&#x2F;dominikh&#x2F;sponsorship</a>.<p>So it appears users can choose their own levels, I do wonder what the minimum is.
miguelmota将近 6 年前
Very cool, this feature was much needed. It would be nice to be able to sponsor specific issues that pay bounties once the pull request is merged and issue is closed instead of only a specific developer. Would also be cool if the developer can specify a preferred payment option other than fiat such as open to accepting cryptocurrencies
55555将近 6 年前
One of the people promoted on this page is not like the others. Two projects, essentially zero work done (one is literally a single line in a readme file, the other a basic html page with a list of words), and yet already asking people for $100 per month to support her. Everyone else put in the work first. smh
reilly3000将近 6 年前
Here&#x27;s when MSFT gets to throw their weight around. GitLab simply could not afford to match this program, and I doubt Atlassian could as well. In a year Microsoft will have won so much share of OSS that this will pay for itself many, many times over in the years to come.
ceronman将近 6 年前
I&#x27;ve been trying to find out which countries are eligible to receive payments, but I haven&#x27;t found any information. Most likely I expect this to be like Kickstarter where basically only developers living in certain developed countries can participate.
EGreg将近 6 年前
Interesting alternative to...<p>Anyone remember how cryptocurrency was going to be the way to pay for open source projects? By which I mean buying the kickstarter-like tokens of the project and trading them on markets, speculating until it launches?
harrygeez将近 6 年前
GitHub is really on a roll lately. Another long awaited feature, if a little late.
ssn将近 6 年前
Contributing to open source software has never been about money. I would be very interested in reading the economical analysis of the impact of this move by GitHub.<p>How will the money incentive align with the existing incentives.
polskibus将近 6 年前
Is this the embrace, extend, extinguish method at work? Introducing a feature that would likely not translate to significant income boost, only to widen the appeal of the free tier? There are plenty of similar sites like others have already mentioned, surely GitHub could&#x27;ve just helped them integrate better instead?<p>Insteaf of developing this feature, maybe GitHub could&#x27;ve spent more time enhancing their issue tracker to be able to fit more complex workflows if necessary? There&#x27;s always opportunity cost that should be considered when working on new features for such a large userbase.
drtse4将近 6 年前
Finally, and they also allow to specify additional external funding platforms via .yaml file (no more wondering if a patreon account is legit or not).
skilled将近 6 年前
Damn! This is surely an amazing QoL feature. Well done.
Vordimous将近 6 年前
Can i just give myself $5K and get the matched $5K?
miki123211将近 6 年前
Anyone has any idea how thiswill work for EU residents? Will we be paying the outrageous US 30% tax and local taxes too?
评论 #19995727 未加载
craftoman将近 6 年前
That&#x27;s how Microsoft plans to monetize GitHub? Not bad....
Legogris将近 6 年前
For a decentralized alternative, see Gitcoin, currently used especially by projects in and around the Ethereum space: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitcoin.co&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gitcoin.co&#x2F;</a>
magnamerc将近 6 年前
Is this GitHub&#x27;s version of a GitCoin competitor?
k__将近 6 年前
Microsoft is gonna centralize the sh*t out of the eco-system. Let&#x27;s see how it goes this time.
评论 #19991544 未加载
ElijahLynn将近 6 年前
Your move GitLab!
评论 #19992609 未加载
benatkin将近 6 年前
Not so fast. People have said this about gittip (now Gratipay), Patreon, Twitch, and now YouTube and Facebook. All of these have been mixed blessings. Here&#x27;s an article about how Patreon doesn&#x27;t work out even when everything goes smoothly: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;theoutline.com&#x2F;post&#x2F;2571&#x2F;no-one-makes-a-living-on-patreon?zd=1&amp;zi=e4lqrxpb" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;theoutline.com&#x2F;post&#x2F;2571&#x2F;no-one-makes-a-living-on-pa...</a><p>&quot;After launching my Patreon, I struggled for months to find work. Patreon filled my downtime, and became a full time job itself. I’d spend hours combing through photos, looking back on notes I’d taken on the road, researching where I’d been. I’d post on Twitter and Instagram with teasers, free stories, anything to attract my followers to my Patreon page. I made friends on the site, I shared their projects on my own social media, and kept up with all my subscribers’ projects. It was a lot of work for little pay, but I was determined. A year later my monthly earnings on Patreon have grown from $120 to $163.&quot;<p>$163 a month in extra income? Cool, right? Not when you spend 5+ hours a week thinking about it.<p>If GitHub gets a lot of participation it will be unsustainable to only take a little on top of a credit card processing fee, and the fee it will be increased to be more like Facebook&#x27;s 30% cut. There are plenty of articles on here about the costs and difficulties of running a payment platform.
评论 #19995191 未加载
评论 #19992248 未加载
评论 #19991751 未加载
评论 #19992612 未加载
评论 #19992817 未加载
评论 #19993842 未加载
评论 #19991742 未加载
评论 #19992109 未加载
评论 #19992660 未加载
评论 #19992803 未加载
评论 #19992251 未加载
评论 #19992022 未加载
评论 #19991746 未加载
评论 #19993194 未加载
评论 #19992787 未加载
评论 #19994401 未加载
评论 #19992271 未加载
评论 #19991863 未加载
yreg将近 6 年前
For now, it seems that the Microsoft acquisition has gone well, right?
评论 #19989896 未加载
评论 #19989815 未加载
trpc将近 6 年前
Does this service work also per project or per user only?
评论 #19991330 未加载
samirillian将近 6 年前
New mode of production please lord anything but capitalism