convert funding notes to rst for easier publishing
This commit is contained in:
		
							parent
							
								
									9fb63489e2
								
							
						
					
					
						commit
						944c8af32a
					
				
							
								
								
									
										206
									
								
								NOTES
									
									
									
									
									
								
							
							
						
						
									
										206
									
								
								NOTES
									
									
									
									
									
								
							| @ -49,8 +49,14 @@ clever tricks like the plague." --Edsger Dijkstra | ||||
| *** easy ledger compatibility testing | ||||
| **** --compare to compare (xml?) output with ledger with same args | ||||
| ** docs | ||||
| *** funding | ||||
| **** vision | ||||
| *** funding document | ||||
| ======= | ||||
| funding | ||||
| ======= | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| vision | ||||
| ====== | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      How to grow the hledger project ? | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      I'm looking for ways to fund active and sustainable hledger | ||||
| @ -69,125 +75,171 @@ clever tricks like the plague." --Edsger Dijkstra | ||||
|      while serving the cause of Financial Solvency! | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      So I'm beginning by posting these notes and inviting your thoughts - | ||||
|      as much or as little as folks want to give. How could we do this so | ||||
|      that all benefit ? | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| **** funding models | ||||
|      as much or as little as folks want to give. How could we do this  | ||||
|      so that all benefit ? | ||||
|       | ||||
| funding models | ||||
| ============== | ||||
|      Brainstorming some possible funding models & processes. | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** grants | ||||
|      * grants | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       How to find possible grant sources ? | ||||
| ****** con | ||||
| ******* getting grant funding is a whole new field to study | ||||
| ******* slow and time intensive, I imagine | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** donations | ||||
|       * con | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * getting grant funding is a whole new field to study | ||||
|        * slow and time intensive, I imagine | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      * donations | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       Solicit donations. | ||||
| ****** pro | ||||
| ******* simple | ||||
| ****** con | ||||
| ******* often difficult | ||||
| ******* donators do not feel a direct benefit | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** shareware | ||||
|       * pro | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * simple | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       * con | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * often difficult | ||||
|        * donators do not feel a direct benefit | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      * shareware | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       Release the project under a non-free license, requiring commercial | ||||
|       users to pay the fee on an honour basis (eg). | ||||
| ****** pro | ||||
| ******* flexible, low administration, encourages trust | ||||
| ****** con | ||||
| ******* effectively closed-source ? would inhibit collaboration | ||||
| ******* benefit is still indirect, only a proportion will pay | ||||
| ******* enforcement/guilt may come into play | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** limited-time premium branch | ||||
|       * pro | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * flexible, low administration, encourages trust | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       * con | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * effectively closed-source ? would inhibit collaboration | ||||
|        * benefit is still indirect, only a proportion will pay | ||||
|        * enforcement/guilt may come into play | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      * limited-time premium branch | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       The funded version of hledger gets some desirable premium features | ||||
|       before the free version and is closed-source.  Funders/customers pay | ||||
|       a fixed price for immediate access to the funded version.  Yearly, a | ||||
|       new funded version is released and the old funded version is merged | ||||
|       into the free version.  (To gain experience it could be done on a | ||||
|       smaller scale, eg monthly/quarterly.) | ||||
| ****** pro | ||||
| ******* all features reach community, predictably | ||||
| ******* customers are also community funders | ||||
| ******* customers receive direct benefit from paying | ||||
| ****** con | ||||
| ******* free sw developers compete/outshine the premium branch | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** bounties | ||||
|       * pro | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * all features reach community, predictably | ||||
|        * customers are also community funders | ||||
|        * customers receive direct benefit from paying | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       * con | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * free sw developers compete/outshine the premium branch | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      * bounties | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       Some (or all) feature, bugfix, project management or other tasks are | ||||
|       published with a bounty attached.  When the bounty is paid by one or | ||||
|       more funders, the task is performed and delivered. Or, bounty is paid | ||||
|       on completion of task (honour system). | ||||
| ****** pro | ||||
| ******* funders receive direct benefit | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** bounties using fundable.org (eg) | ||||
|       * pro | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * funders receive direct benefit | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      * bounties using fundable.org (eg) | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       A more organised form of the above, perhaps facilitating trust, | ||||
|       co-funding and larger bounties. | ||||
| ****** pro | ||||
| ******* proven process developed by others | ||||
| ****** con | ||||
| ******* fundable takes a cut | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** hosted service | ||||
|       * pro | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * proven process developed by others | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       * con | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * fundable takes a cut | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      * hosted service | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       Offer hosted and managed ledgers, perhaps with premium features, for | ||||
|       a monthly fee | ||||
| ****** pro | ||||
| ******* proven model | ||||
| ******* clear benefit to customers, especially non-technies | ||||
| ****** con | ||||
| ******* success of free/self-installed version competes with hosting service | ||||
| ******* some will avoid web-hosting their financial data | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** customisation | ||||
|       * pro | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|        * proven model | ||||
|        * clear benefit to customers, especially non-technies | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       * con | ||||
|   | ||||
|        * success of free/self-installed version competes with hosting service | ||||
|        * some will avoid web-hosting their financial data | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      * customisation | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       Offer per-user customisations, possibly to be merged in the trunk, | ||||
|       for a fee | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** support | ||||
|      * support | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       Offer user/developer support for a fee | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** training | ||||
|      * training | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       Offer application and/or financial training for a fee | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** profit sharing/tithing | ||||
|      * profit sharing/tithing | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       Each period (quarter, half-year, year), donate 10% (eg) to project | ||||
|       contributors and/or supporting projects | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** transparent funding | ||||
|      * transparent funding | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       Funding and usage of funds is published on the web as a ledger | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ***** opaque funding | ||||
|      * opaque funding | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|       All funding and spending need not be made public | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| **** strengths | ||||
| strengths | ||||
| ========= | ||||
|      hledger has some aptitudes in this area: | ||||
| ***** hledger deals with money => hledger users will tend to have some money | ||||
| ***** hledger's purpose is to increase financial success => users will feel its value to their bottom line | ||||
| ***** hledger is a tool that can support project funding, eg by publishing community funding data | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| **** weaknesses | ||||
| ***** hledger doesn't have a nice ui yet | ||||
| ***** hledger has a limited featureset | ||||
| ***** hledger requires work, eg data entry and chart of accounts maintenance | ||||
| ***** hledger is geeky | ||||
| ***** there is competition | ||||
| ***** hledger has no compelling market niche (aside from payment-averse free software users) | ||||
|     * hledger deals with money => hledger users will tend to have some money | ||||
|     * hledger's purpose is to increase financial success => users will feel its value to their bottom line | ||||
|     * hledger is a tool that can support project funding, eg by publishing community funding data | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| **** competitors/fellow niche inhabitants | ||||
| ***** web apps | ||||
| ****** netsuite | ||||
| ****** sql-ledger, ledgersmb | ||||
| ****** wesabe | ||||
| ****** ... | ||||
| ***** desktop apps | ||||
| ****** quickbooks | ||||
| ****** quicken | ||||
| ****** ms money | ||||
| ****** grisbi | ||||
| ****** gnucash | ||||
| ****** excel | ||||
| ****** ledger! | ||||
| ****** ... | ||||
| weaknesses | ||||
| ========== | ||||
|     * hledger doesn't have a nice ui yet | ||||
|     * hledger has a limited featureset | ||||
|     * hledger requires work, eg data entry and chart of accounts maintenance | ||||
|     * hledger is geeky | ||||
|     * there is competition | ||||
|     * hledger has no compelling market niche (aside from payment-averse free software users) | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| competitors/fellow niche inhabitants | ||||
| ==================================== | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|     * web apps | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      * netsuite | ||||
|      * sql-ledger, ledgersmb | ||||
|      * wesabe | ||||
|      * ... | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|     * desktop apps | ||||
| 
 | ||||
|      * quickbooks | ||||
|      * quicken | ||||
|      * ms money | ||||
|      * grisbi | ||||
|      * gnucash | ||||
|      * excel | ||||
|      * ledger! | ||||
|      * ... | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| *** --version | ||||
| *** --help | ||||
|  | ||||
		Loading…
	
		Reference in New Issue
	
	Block a user