The Creator of Homebrew's Plan To Get Open Source Contributors Paid - Using Blockchain (stackoverflow.blog) 44
The creator of the Linux/macOS package manager Homebrew has a new package manager named Tea. But according to Stack Overflow's podcast, the software also "aims to solve the problem of providing funding for popular open source projects."
While he is not a crypto bull, Max was inspired with a solution for the open source funding dilemma by his efforts to buy and sell an NFT. A contract written in code and shared in public enforced a rule sending a portion of his proceeds to the digital objects original creator. What if the same funding mechanism could be applied to open source projects? In March of 2022, Max and his co-founder launched Tea, a sort of spirtual successor to Homebrew. It has a lot of new features Max wanted in a package manager, plus a blockchain based approach to ensuring that creators, maintainers, and contributors of open source software can all get paid for their efforts.
You can read Max's launch post on Tea here and yes, of course there is a white paper.
The paper describes the proposed solution as "a decentralized system for fairly remunerating open-source developers based on their contributions to the entire ecosystem and enacted through the tea incentive algorithm applied across all entries in the tea registry." And the launch post calls tea "our revolution against a failing system," arguing "We're taking our knowledge of how to make development more efficient and throwing innovations nobody has ever really considered before.
"Package managers haven't been sexy. Until now. Most importantly, we're moving the package registry on-chain (relax, we'll use a low-energy proof of stake chain). This has numerous benefits due to the inherent benefits of blockchain technology." For starters, decentralized storage will make the packages always-available and immutable, signed by maintainers themselves. But there's more: web3 has enabled novel new ways to distribute value, and with our system people who care about the health of the open source ecosystem buy some token and stake it. Periodically, we reward this staking because it is securing our token network. We give a portion of these rewards to the staker and a portion to packages of their choice along with all the dependencies of those packages.
Note that no portion goes to us. We're not like the other app stores.... tea is the home to a DAO that will ensure the open source maintainers that keep the Internet running are rewarded as they deserve.
An introduction to the white paper adds that in the spirit of the open source movement, "we're inviting developers, speculators, and enthusiasts alike to contribute to our white paper and help brew the future of the internet. This is our revolutionary undertaking to create equitable openâsource for web3, and we want you to be a part of laying its groundwork."
Thanks to guest reader for submitting the story.
You can read Max's launch post on Tea here and yes, of course there is a white paper.
The paper describes the proposed solution as "a decentralized system for fairly remunerating open-source developers based on their contributions to the entire ecosystem and enacted through the tea incentive algorithm applied across all entries in the tea registry." And the launch post calls tea "our revolution against a failing system," arguing "We're taking our knowledge of how to make development more efficient and throwing innovations nobody has ever really considered before.
"Package managers haven't been sexy. Until now. Most importantly, we're moving the package registry on-chain (relax, we'll use a low-energy proof of stake chain). This has numerous benefits due to the inherent benefits of blockchain technology." For starters, decentralized storage will make the packages always-available and immutable, signed by maintainers themselves. But there's more: web3 has enabled novel new ways to distribute value, and with our system people who care about the health of the open source ecosystem buy some token and stake it. Periodically, we reward this staking because it is securing our token network. We give a portion of these rewards to the staker and a portion to packages of their choice along with all the dependencies of those packages.
Note that no portion goes to us. We're not like the other app stores.... tea is the home to a DAO that will ensure the open source maintainers that keep the Internet running are rewarded as they deserve.
An introduction to the white paper adds that in the spirit of the open source movement, "we're inviting developers, speculators, and enthusiasts alike to contribute to our white paper and help brew the future of the internet. This is our revolutionary undertaking to create equitable openâsource for web3, and we want you to be a part of laying its groundwork."
Thanks to guest reader for submitting the story.
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
So it's a complicated donate button.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Its worse than that.
So this solves nothing at all, because those people being few and far between are the problem *now*.
Another attempt to use a technical means to solve a social issue, without addressing the underlying aspect of lack of interest in the first place.
And no, the tokens involved here aint going to pay the rewards on their own through inherent value - no one needs or wants yet another token system, seriously.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Agree 100%. Solves 0% of the problem while adding all of the nonsense associated with bullshit crypto currency. I'm sure if you want to help open source developers and you are willing to send them some of that nasty dirty disgusting "fiat currency" they'd be happy to accept it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So... (Score:1)
Perhaps the dev is, but it can be very complicated to set up and accept fiat currency, especially internationally. If youâ(TM)re in Europe, you probably have to register as a company and pay massive taxes and regulatory fees yearly, in the US income taxes may be affected if you get a large donation, if you want to donate to developers in Iran or North Korea, expect a visit from the men in black and if you donate just a dollar to many countries in South American currencies you may as well ship them a re
Re: (Score:3)
Hey, they could probably get FTT really cheap. No need to make another one.
Re: (Score:2)
They're trivial to create. Buying one seems like a huge waste of time and money.
Then again, wasting time and money is unavoidable when dealing with crypto...
Re: (Score:2)
But if you buy something like FTT you get all the brand recognition and fond memories that go with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So it's a complicated donate button... (Score:1)
...to solve a non-existent problem
"our revolution against a failing system,"
...to correct a system that has worked well for seventy years [wikipedia.org].
Those who aren't incentivized enough under the current patchwork of various incentive systems (commercial/open source hybrid, commercial donation, private donation, and altruistic) are quite welcome to hock their wares commercially.
Bravo! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Bravo! (Score:5, Insightful)
Amazing practical use of Web3 technology!
Or a reminder of why we don't want Web3?
Re: (Score:2)
Practical? Web3?
Mod parent up! +5 Funny.
This does not interest me. (Score:2)
I guess that makes me a Tea bagger.
Interesting enough to watch... (Score:1)
We'll see if it turns into something what the protocol ends up like etc.
I like the use of blockchain for validation etc.
well, the beginning of the end of brew (Score:3)
how long until I have to purge brew due to this?
Re: (Score:1)
Source: am a Homebrew maintainer; also: https://twitter.com/MacHomebre... [twitter.com]
Re: well, the beginning of the end of brew (Score:2)
Homebrew use of fully cloned git repositories wasting hundreds of MB of storage per end user machine is tragic. It used to have shallow clones but they cause high processing on the github.com servers and switched to full clones to please GitHub.
Why not create a new repository each year with trimmed history, then have brew set a new origin accordingly? It really have no use for the entire brew history for the past 10+ years on every single machine I use. Git is a terrible software distribution mechanism. I u
Re: (Score:1)
Back in my day (Score:1)
Ha ha, that's funny (Score:5, Funny)
I like how now that everyone sees that the crypto cow has kicked the bucket, it's become de rigueur for those people still trying to milk that dead cow to state "I am not a crypto bro, BUT..."
Re: (Score:3)
I like how now that everyone sees that the crypto cow has kicked the bucket, it's become de rigueur for those people still trying to milk that dead cow to state "I am not a crypto bro, BUT..."
Or "Jumped the shark" -- assuming that saying hasn't, well... you know.
Re: Ha ha, that's funny (Score:1)
Well, the best applications of new technology usually happen after the first bubble of excitement bursts. Heâ(TM)s trying to position this as part of the slow trickle of real innovation that comes after the hype.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Haha actually I hsf originally led with something to the tune of "now that the crypto horse is thoroughly dead", but rewrote it after I realized I was mixing my metaphors.
Re: (Score:2)
It's git off my lawn.
Still not now. (Score:5, Funny)
Package managers haven't been sexy. Until now. ... we're moving the package registry on-chain ...
We have very different definitions of "sexy".
Re: Still not now. (Score:2)
I really wish people would stop trying to monetize (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't work all that well. Every now and then we hear about someone who got fed up supporting some vital package used by huge numbers if projects and businesses. NTP is probably the best known example.
This seems to be solving the wrong problem. We need commercial users to contribute.
Re: (Score:1)
Why does anyone need to contribute?
We used to say that open source projects were about "scratching an itch". All the people spending tremendous amounts of time supporting major projects unpaid or essentially unpaid aren't chained to a keyboard. They can put in as much or as little time as they ever did. If it isn't enough for some rich corporations then the corporations can fork it and pay devs internally or they can pay the open source dev a real number worth working for if that's what's required.
And ev
Re: (Score:2)
Writing stuff is a one-time effort that can be and often is donated.
Maintaining it is an ongoing, and often increasingly time-consuming and difficult, chore. Most folks don't do very much of it, for very long, without some form of compensation.
Re: I really wish people would stop trying to mone (Score:2)
I think it's a bizarre situation to put yourself in, "I've made this thing, it's free and open anyone can contribute and make use" then later "actually I need money for food, can you all see your way to contributing something." If your hobby is too time consuming and expensive you need to step away. We don't get pestered to contribute to o
Re: (Score:1)
The system works as it is.
I would also say that it does not work.
Once, I was doing a small review of Linux kernel out of curiosity.
I found few vulnerabilities in SSL certificate management.
I would submit a patch if I knew that I am going to get paid for that.
Re: (Score:2)
The system works as it is. Stop trying to extract money from work built upon contributions.
The system may be good enough, but it is piss poor compared to its potential. There have been a few times when I've wanted to make some fixes in open source projects, but was too tied up with other things and never got back to it. I recently started using a much needed plugin, Multi Account Containers for Firefox, and found it doesn't work for a major use case: separating google searches from google logged in account activity like mail. The project would need a medium improvement: block/prompt/allow lists a
We don't need another Homebrew (Score:1)
Something ambiguous (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You're on slashdot. ASCII "art" of nude girls that requires a 1975 9-pin printer to see is considered sexy here.
Algorithm searchs for an application (Score:1)
News at 11.
You lost me at... (Score:5, Insightful)
"inherent benefits of blockchain technology"
Re: (Score:1)
Think of it this way: block chain crypto crap has pulled all the scammers together pushing the same shit. 99.999% of people can safely ignore all the scammers at once.
Without crypto shit there'd be zillions more scams going on flashing at us from every url and browser refresh.
It's like you know you'll be reasonably safe as long as you don't go to certain neighborhoods at night.
software supply chain (Score:1)
Research grants (Score:1)
Research grants are another way how to get money for creating an open source project.
It is different from donations and bounties.
Simpler solution (Score:2)
Package managers are about convenience. It is great that we get them for free, but people can build their own from source if a package does not exist.
So why not have a subscription based repository where you can pay a small monthly fee for access to the whole repository. The contributors get paid based on the number of active subscribers to their package.
I would model it like this, contributors can decide if their package is free or not.
For example, $2.50 per month with no minimum term, would be attract