Chris Travers wrote:
However, what is likely to take the most time (not labor) is just coordination with the community, making sure that what is generally applicable is separated from that which is not, etc.
I think you and Joshua are arguing against the very thing I am trying to achieve
I have split my budget into two. Half of it would be dedicated to what you describe as the 1.3-1.4 lifecycle - I assume that those funding will get a rough veto on the big stuff, but beyond that we are simply buying developer time. The other half is reserved for where my needs deviate from the 1.3/1.4 timeline (although it's intended that any changes are rolled back into the main application). I don't want to be involved in some big debate figuring out how you spend the core of this development time - that's just a waste of the time I want to be paying for you to be developing. However, be clear that if this comes off I am expecting to see clear value for money and some demonstration that the money turned into code - I don't think this is unreasonable?
It's distressing that no one else has piped up so perhaps I have completely missed the mark...
I am absolutely gobsmacked that there aren't a bunch of companies following LSMB that we can't scrape together $40K just to buy 4+ months of dedicated development on the 1.3/1.4 roadmap...
Come on folks - this isn't particularly big bucks for software? The commercial competition costs of the order of magnitude I am suggestion just for a couple of licences...
Here's hoping... Ed W