> So think hard about what help Google et al could actually be providing to help log4j here.
I think you make a perfectly valid point and one that shouldn't be overlooked. How about this:
"Here's a $100K and an isolated penthouse suite down the road rented for the month where you can focus on fixing the problem and not be interrupted by screaming children. Here's a phone number if you need to delegate any specific tasks to additional teams."
Incentive to help. No added pressure. Just one practical example.
I don’t quite understand why you keep coming back to luxury apartments and private jets.
If children and family were viewed as too much of a distraction, I’m pretty sure the CTO (in this scenario) would simply choose a developer who lacks those distractions.
Let’s say the engineers chosen do have family. Why wouldn’t the company just comp a room in a local hotel?
I'm so confused. I thought we were talking about a single volunteer open source developer responsible for a vital tool, and it was too onerous to give them additional staff.
If you want to help someone, give them cash. A blank check. Not "here's what I think would be helpful and now you should arrange to use it". Not a week at a penthouse, not a butler, not a private jet. Enough cash to pay for those things if they want them.
It isn't quite simple; when negotiating it is better to give cash. When donating it is better to give goods. Particularly if there is more than one person involved on the receiving side.
You didn’t explain why it’s a perfect valid point
It doesn’t seem reasonable for Johnson & Johnston at a valuation of 1/2 trillion to free load
You are kind of talking about greater good, perhaps those charitable donations should go to medical research or homeless shelters rather than reducing the burden on for profit companies
The valid point is that too many cooks can spoil the soup. Mythical man month, if you will. Adding people who don't have the institutional knowledge to a software project even if they are rock stars at their own companies could do more harm inadvertently when trying to fix something time critical. So the additional proposal made here acknowledges that, and instead tries to remove as many non-work distractions and discomforts as possible for the people who CAN reliably fix this fast.
For sure, but what could be done is eliminating any non-superflous task so they can focus on resolving that specific problem.
Have a team handle all github issues and media inquiries. Another team focus on initially evaluating all incoming pull requests to check for egregious errors or applicability.
Only after making it through the gauntlet would the original maintainers need to read and/or respond to them.
Especially when such overwhelming public attention and pressure overtakes a relatively small team like this one.
There is still a risk that the kind of time required for the maintainers to have to get those teams up to speed on the project and how it works and what needs to be done could be just as much of a distraction. Adding more triage teams might be good in the future, but for now, adding more outsiders without proper context might just add stress.
As with openssl, what needs to be done is that these volunteers need to be given cash so this is more than just a volunteer project. If a particular corporate entity doesn’t want to sponsor some of the maintainers to work on it full time, then the project needs full-time sponsorship by the Linux Foundation, ASF or under the OpenJDK.
This explains how such a “solution” Benefits log4j and log4j users. The part I question from the start is why “google should”
Vs “google should” pump the equivalent money into medical research vs “google should” make what is does better
I think you make a perfectly valid point and one that shouldn't be overlooked. How about this:
"Here's a $100K and an isolated penthouse suite down the road rented for the month where you can focus on fixing the problem and not be interrupted by screaming children. Here's a phone number if you need to delegate any specific tasks to additional teams."
Incentive to help. No added pressure. Just one practical example.