19
Why do more widely-adopted OSS take so long to review patches?
(kbin.melroy.org)
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
No? This question indicates a fundamental lack of understanding of the social relations, power dynamics, and motivations in open source software.
How do I learn more about these things?
One possible starting point could be the now classic essay The Cathedral and the Bazaar:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar
http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/
I don't know, if there's a more general resource, but in the case of Firefox, the donations are so far away from covering the development costs, that they're not even being used for that. Rather, they earn money from search engine deals and are trying to diversify with Pocket, ads, MDN- and VPN-related services etc..
In the case of LLVM, I don't see how they would get many donations to begin with. Maybe Mozilla chips them some of that leftover donation money (they have been doing that with various smaller OSS projects), but I can't imagine much else.
LLVM is probably largely being kept alive by companies or programming language orgs scratching their own itches.
That's 250 million for development. That chart is also in thousands.
And this is somewhat beside the point, but Lunduke is a conspiracy nut job and rather looking for an egregious story than the truth. Whatever he interprets into these numbers, you should double check it.
This is a good question. I learned it the slow, hard way, back when Apache was “a patchy server”. Maybe someone can suggest books or online resources for getting up to speed quicker.