C1REX wrote:C1REX wrote:How Daniel Robbins could/can make a living from working on Gentoo/Fun-Too?
Why not simple donations?
The problem with positing donations for developers is one of scale. When your metric for success is that a developer "can make a living" from working on the project, then you need the donations to sum up to a livable wage for that developer, and to maintain that level with some consistency. Livable varies by country, preferred lifestyle, and other factors, but as a baseline, we could say that it needs to be above what the developer could earn working a minimum wage job. For most developers, if they're qualified to do true development (including writing/debugging programs), they're well on their way to being able to get a corporate or government job as a "software developer," which pushes the baseline up toward the salary offered for those positions. (We can assume some slack if we assume the developer in question likes open-source development enough to make up for reduced pay, but there's a limit to how much lower people will go just to do something they enjoy.) When last I looked, recent college graduates taking software developer jobs were offered salaries substantially above minimum wage, and senior developers can beat that by a significant percentage.
For a developer in the United States, it's probably not unreasonable to say that "making a living" would mean an income of at least $45,000/year. (Consider also that because this hypothetical developer is paid entirely out of donations, he or she must also pay out-of-pocket for things that a corporate employee would receive as company-paid benefits, so a private sector employee with a stated gross salary of $45k is already better off than our hypothetical donation-driven developer.) If this developer lives in an expensive part of the country (high taxes, high cost of living, etc.), $45k isn't enough. I vaguely recall that $60k/year was considered borderline poverty in New York City. A corporation employing someone in New York City would (grudgingly) offer a salary sufficient to cover the greater cost of living there, relative to what they might offer to someone who will live and work in a cheap state. We can't necessarily assume our hypothetical developer would be both willing and able to move to a cheap locale, so "livable wage" may need to be stepped up, even though we don't need the developer to live in the expensive state. It gets even more expensive if we assume at least some of these developers are married, have kids, and need to earn enough to support the entire family.
Now look at how much disposable income you are willing to donate to the project. Think about how many people like you need to donate, on a recurring basis, to get this one hypothetical developer to a livable wage. Now scale that up to cover enough developers that the project can rely on enough hours/week to make good forward progress. How many developers do we end up paying? 10? 30? 50? How many users do we need to be able to pay that many developers enough that they will spend their time working on the project instead of taking a paid job with a traditional employer?