Bountysource activity

[Nick Sabalausky]

On 3/13/2014 2:40 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>
> The only Phobos one is the std.getopt one, however its situation is two
> abandoned patches and no clear goal as to what constitutes a change
> worthy of marking the issue as "fixed" and paying out the bounty.
>

Yea, this is actually a general issue I think needs addressed. Some of 
the bounties can be quite unclear on what exactly is expected in order 
to fulfill the bounty's requirements.

The waters are muddied even more when other people have already made 
progress towards closing the issue (ex: All the years of work Don's 
already put into "[CTFE] copy-on-write is slow and causes huge memory 
usage").

I find there's bounties I'm more inclined to avoid just because I don't 
want to step on anyone's toes. Or because if I do X and Y for a bounty, 
I don't want to and worry about putting the bounty's backer in an 
awkward position, or accidentally looking greedy, just because there was 
also a Z I didn't know was expected (or maybe a performance improvement 
wasn't *enough* of an improvement) just because the issue wasn't 
well-defined.

But maybe I'm just being socially paranoid?