From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Kastrup Subject: Re: Recording the current branch on each commit? Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 11:00:15 +0200 Message-ID: <87r44g33z4.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <535C47BF.2070805@game-point.net> <535D4085.4040707@game-point.net> <535D6EB1.9080208@game-point.net> <535e18cdc7bce_338911e930c72@nysa.notmuch> <87bnvl6bdg.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <535e8e4253196_45651483310b3@nysa.notmuch> <152626b3-0642-4e26-9333-7d911d45c669@email.android.com> <535edfb9baa4a_4c5c11c92f0bc@nysa.notmuch> <535f1d4d8cbbb_762310ef30c9c@nysa.notmuch> <220967ee-98a9-4731-88c0-43a9cba7220a@email.android.com> <535f62c1e740a_45e485b30887@nysa.notmuch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: James Denholm , Jeremy Morton , Johan Herland , Git mailing list To: Felipe Contreras X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Apr 29 11:00:58 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Wf3uM-0001JK-9E for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 11:00:58 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756224AbaD2JAx (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2014 05:00:53 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:55104 "EHLO fencepost.gnu.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751680AbaD2JAv (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2014 05:00:51 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54138 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wf3uE-0001nE-CA; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 05:00:50 -0400 Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 19057DF406; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 11:00:15 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <535f62c1e740a_45e485b30887@nysa.notmuch> (Felipe Contreras's message of "Tue, 29 Apr 2014 03:28:49 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Felipe Contreras writes: > Contributors don't have any responsibility to champion their patches. > It is pro bono work. No, that's just the appearance that should be upheld in the higher society. It's ok to get paid for work on Git as long as you don't mention it in public. It's also ok to get paid for _promises_ of work if you can make people believe you. Open Source is not much different from how politics and society in general work in the U.S.A. To get the real wads of money, you first need to get the means not to have to talk about money (it's ok if you do it by means totally opposed to "the political cause" as long as you don't talk about it), then you have to prefinance people's trust in you not being there for the money, and then you are in a position to get paid for your work. Anyway, I digress. Even without all that not so "pro bono" background to "pro bono work", there is still a difference between "pro bono" work ending up in the wastebin and "pro bono" work ending up in a product. Even while the ones getting the benefits from your work will not feel an obligation to make it worth your while, there is a difference in satisfaction between getting your work trashed and getting it used. The satisfaction by exploding in self-righteousness tends to be a poor substitute and is comparatively short-lived. Yes, it may mean that you have to carry your child the last yards rather than shout it across the finishing line. Even though it should have legs perfectly suited to get it across the track on its own. Only that way you get to pat it on its head. -- David Kastrup