Subject: Re: time spent per package
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: James K. Lowden <email@example.com>
Date: 03/12/2003 08:37:29
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 12:46:15 -0700, <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> - Is there any interest in packaging scientific applications?
> - Should the packager(s) be compensated in any way?
> - If so, how should the compensation be determined or on what should
> it be based?
> - How should the nature of each package be defined (e.g., some are
> self-contained, whereas others should be subdivided into several)?
In the 18th century, the British crown offered a huge prize to any system
that could determine longitude. (They never paid the reward, but they got
their system anyway.)
I think prizes might suit your purpose here. Suppose nmsu.edu could raise
a small amount of money, possibly from a grant. The university would
define the scope of the project and its price, and publicize it. TNF
would determine who claims the award on delivery of the package (to the
university's satisfaction, of course).
It isn't possible IMHO to pay people their going rate to get this work
done. But a prize would be recognition and thanks (and pocket money). It
might well motivate someone to contribute a package they otherwise
Definition of project scope is notoriously slippery. It's important that
the terms of the deal be clear, else its motivational force will be nil.