Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by barnabee | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

barnabee

Spending it on other projects is a bad idea:

- it'd be distracting, they're open source devs/maintainers not fund managers

- it could be divisive and they'd risk taking flak if they get it "wrong"

- it creates a class of "approved" clients and related projects

I think the Jellyfin team's approach is pretty reasonable.

That said, if I was them I'd probably do what the Helix devs do [0] and rather than telling people to stop donating, remind them that donations are a "tip" to the project and shouldn't be assumed to be buying you anything or paying to ramp up development (or marketing or anything else). I really appreciate that stance and their attitude that it's great to have the money and they'll spend it if and when they need it, while also encouraging people to consider donating elsewhere if they want to have a bigger impact.

[0] https://github.com/helix-editor/helix/issues/2220

View on HN

> it'd be distracting, they're open source devs/maintainers not fund managers

Exactly this! It is extra responsibility which distracts from the core project.

Exactly. This is something we've discussed internally a LOT and this is basically my take as to why not to distribute the money elsewhere, with the added #4 of "people who donated to us, donated to us - is it really right to take their money and give it to other projects, even if we think it is?".

Yes. I'm not sure what a donation is for, if not for the recipient to spend as they see fit. And this isn't a matter of spending donor money on unrelated but deserving causes - as you say, supporting clients supports the ecosystem.

I understand the argument that deciding who gets the money and how much is nontrivial and perhaps better left up to individual donors, but I disagree that it would be dishonest or misappropriating funds if you were to do so.

It's not that black and white.

IMHO, most people donating to a software project would assume the funds are used for something related to that software project. Of course you can invent a narrative saying that the funds are now given to <developer> of the project, and now that he owns the money, he wants to donate to <some other project> -- it's probably a valid legal argument in case disputes arise, but it probably isn't what the original donors had in mind...

This is only my opinion, but when I donate for a software, I do it as an appreciation for the effort and time put into that software. I don't care what the owner does with that money.

And spending on other projects might create tax problems for them, their donors and maybe the other projects...

> Spending it on other projects is a bad idea:

Disagree

> - it'd be distracting, they're open source devs/maintainers not fund managers

True. Dedicating time & effort to this would take away time & effort from development. But the harsh reality here is:

1. Client devs simply will not receive anywhere near as much funding as the drop Jellyfin are proposing/asking for.

2. It's clear from the article that Jellyfin's main devs would prefer a world where those client devs do receive such funds.

It's ultimately a trade-off: Jellyfin central dev would take a hit from taking on such a fiscal role, but the Client dev community would benefit, which sounds like it would benefit Jellyfin ultimately. Entirely up to Jellyfin's devs on whether they feel the hit would be worthwhile but I don't think it should be dismissed out of hand & it's worth suggesting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com