As part of Grow Open Source Day meetup in Tokyo, I'll give a talk which goes through the [many] issues which currently still persist in the world of open source. Here are the slides I will be presenting.
For this bounty, I want to hear some novel ideas for how some of these issues might be tackled, in ways they weren't before. These issues have existed for a long time, and many wise women and men have already tried to tackle them, so please be creative! We want to hear ideas that are NEW!
Be creative! Have fun! Open source is immensely important, both to us as an organization, to the Ethereum ecosystem, and the future of open tech across the globe. 🌎🌍🌏
About Open sources,
I don't know if their solution, but what about making a donation in under of application. Yes, not all people will help but like big company or someone who earns more or wanna create big project so it's like that he can donate.
you can also be not open source, add inscription field to get details why he wants this application if its company then must pay.
Reason #2. No One Contributes ; people might not be contributing because of being afraid to lose their ideas so There should be code acting like a filter that it reads and screens contribution before updating the open source so it will accept any contributor but with only compatible contribution that when they are added they up-date it positively and it measures the positive addition to the software and should not allow anyone to take anything without permission from basic code that have always have to be adhered
I think that you can find a solution for reason #2, #3 and possibly #5 by looking at what motivates humans to act. People's motivations can generally be ascribed as coming for 3 sources. Fear, Greed and Prestige. I think there's no way to effectively harness fear so I will look at the other two.
Monetary Reward (Greed) - The trick would be to provide a way for monetary reward without violating the cornerstone of open source that it is free to use. I think you could do this by making the contribution voluntary by having a cryptocurrency tip jar that people who thought the project was worthwhile or helped them solve the problem could contribute. The monetary rewards could be delegated to those that contributed by a community based voting system.
Social Reward (Prestige) - You could have a system that awards badges that people can display on their profile for hitting contribution milestones. Such as pushing 100 commits. You could make these social rewards even more valuable by structuring the site so it is easy for people who are looking for people to do paid work to search the site and find people with the skill sets that they need.
Perhaps you would consider hiring or working along with a marketing/promoter who can help spread awareness and strategically enter the market for you. I have worked on promoting digital content and downloads before generating 150,000 unique impressions the first month and thousands of downloads for applications using Branch Analytics!
This is a problem that really matters to me since I'm doing open-source work just for the sake of serving the community while having fun and learning new things.
This is pretty short but I think the best way to improve open-source is to "micro-monetize" issues, encouraging contributions and maintenance. But the main problem here is that it would only benefit the contributors, not the creators. So I came up with an idea of reversing the process by monetizing creators to create specific libraries/frameworks, as companies.
A company with big involvement in open-source such as Google can definitely encourage open-source by rewarding creators based on needs, which themselves will encourage contributors by following a logical schema. It was hardly feasible a few years ago, but today there's a game change: smart-contracts. Automating the whole process can really change the industry.
I think Gitcoin and Bounties.network are a good example of how we can monetize issues by connecting companies and individuals to contributors, and I think the next step for them would be to connect companies to creators and automate the process of funding, via smart-contracts.
I believe this solution would help solve problems #2, #3, #5, and probably #4 since having a company name on a repo gives it certain notoriety which kind-of makes the content un-stealable.
Also, regarding problem #6, I think most companies are open-sourcing key libraries for the sake of creating a market value around it. An example would be Facebook open-sourcing React-Native as their horse on the very competitive dev market opposing Apple and Google.
Really good open-source libraries can help their creators (and sometimes even contributors) gain some opportunities. A good example would be François Chollet creating Keras and being hired by Google for maintaining it. The idea is to automate this process in a seamless way.
Reason #2: No One Contributes
**Contributors don’t follow the repo’s existing code standards
An idea (maybe far-fetched, but I think it is new): use a machine-learning based approach to automatically 'translate' the user commit in the repo's code standard.