[Ardour-Users] Could this solve Ardour's financial headache?

Mark Knecht markknecht at gmail.com
Thu Jan 8 10:27:55 PST 2009

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:29 AM, John Rigg <au at sound-man.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 06:47:55PM -0000, John Emmas wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Kevin Cosgrove"
>> Subject: Re: [Ardour-Users] Could this solve Ardour's financial headache?
>> >
>> >That's fine for the folks who get tarballs.  But, that also delays
>> >wider testing because people might wait for a tarball to do their
>> >testing.  How would that work?  Pay to be a tester?  Hmmm.
>> >
>> Flawed logic, I think - because anyone who only tests the "stable" versions
>> isn't really a beta tester.  Beta testers would probably be the easiest
>> category to deal with....  anyone who notches up a certain number of entries
>> in mantis can apply to have their $35 refunded.  But I seriously doubt that
>> anyone would ask for a refund.  Come on guys - we're talking about 35
>> dollars here!
> Right, so in addition to paying a monthly subscription, subscribers
> who also contribute test reports of the svn code will have to
> pay another $35 in order to do that. I can't see how that will encourage
> regular beta testers (many of whom would already be subscribers, I'd guess).
> Refunding after a certain number of Mantis entries wouldn't work for those
> who submit reports and/or patches direct to the ardour-dev list.
> John

And giving a refund might encourage me to make funky bug reports as a
way to get my costs reduced but at the same time raises development
costs because someone is required to look at this stuff and make
decisions about how many quarters and pennies to give me. ;-)

Not good.

- Mark

More information about the Ardour-Users mailing list