Its a working document. I'm seeking knowledgeable people who might better
understand how the bounty could be better distributed. Its ultimately just
an example.

On 4/30/10 4:43 PM, "Paul Louden" <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> On 4/30/2010 5:40 PM, Jared Albers wrote:
>> Its not meant to be structured like that. I simply am unaware of all the
>> pieces needed to get rockbox support. That is why they aren't listed on the
>> spreadsheet. But the bounty is meant to include Rockbox as well.
> But there's a flat 40% reserved for Linux support. Shouldn't that be
> "Rockbox or Linux support" rather than creating a financial incentive
> specifically for integration with Linux, but not one for Rockbox?
>
> Basically, I don't understand how that's split up at all - what do you
> mean by "40% - Linux" and why should Linux get special consideration
> above and beyond where Rockbox does not (especially when proposing this
> on the Rockbox list)?
Received on 2010-05-01