Kickstarter-like campaign for incorporating extension functionality?

[snupy]

There have been a few interesting threads regarding extensions lately. One of the topics discussed is if SW could/should incorporate the functionality of certain extensions (generally by coding it themselves rather than incorporating the extension original code). As many other users, I believe the answer to be yes.

As far as I have seen, the main problem seems to be that incorporating extensions functionality risks to be investing many coding hours without sufficient economical return. For this reason, I wonder if a kickstarter-like model where some functionality is going to be incorporated (and maintained obvs) by SW provided that a certain level of funding is reached could be viable.

I would be interested in opinions about this by both SW and fellow users. I can already think of a couple of potential issues.

- FG is not subscription based, and I believe we all want it to stay that way. General development of FG should not become paywalled, but imho there is space for a kickstarter format for more specific/niche features.

- The developing team at SW is pretty small I think. Funded development of niche features could risk delaying the not funded more general development.

- It is healthy to have external developers working on FG extensions, so SW would need not to step on their toes.

There are probably other issues which I am not seeing. Still, I believe that, if carefully approached, the system could work. How does the community feel about this? Would SW be willing to consider something like this?

[Laerun]

There have been a few interesting threads regarding extensions lately. One of the topics discussed is if SW could/should incorporate the functionality of certain extensions (generally by coding it themselves rather than incorporating the extension original code). As many other users, I believe the answer to be yes.

As far as I have seen, the main problem seems to be that incorporating extensions functionality risks to be investing many coding hours without sufficient economical return. For this reason, I wonder if a kickstarter-like model where some functionality is going to be incorporated (and maintained obvs) by SW provided that a certain level of funding is reached could be viable.

I would be interested in opinions about this by both SW and fellow users. I can already think of a couple of potential issues.

- FG is not subscription based, and I believe we all want it to stay that way. General development of FG should not become paywalled, but imho there is space for a kickstarter format for more specific/niche features.

- The developing team at SW is pretty small I think. Funded development of niche features could risk delaying the not funded more general development.

- It is healthy to have external developers working on FG extensions, so SW would need not to step on their toes.

There are probably other issues which I am not seeing. Still, I believe that, if carefully approached, the system could work. How does the community feel about this? Would SW be willing to consider something like this?

I like where you are going with this.
Potentially make a top 3-5 to include and go for it, as long as the original extension authors are able to sign away their code.

[Atua]

I like this idea too, seems that it may work

[Egheal]

I'd find it annoying to have official features that would be considered premium, i.e. not usable by everyone.
Especially with features that should already be integrated like Auras for D&D or better-looking character sheets (Big Portraits extension).
I'd certainly pay for them to be integrated via a kickstarter, but only if they become free for all users thereafter (considering kickstarter participants as benefactors of sorts, I suppose...).

[snupy]

I'd find it annoying to have official features that would be considered premium, i.e. not usable by everyone.
Especially with features that should already be integrated like Auras for D&D or better-looking character sheets (Big Portraits extension).
I'd certainly pay for them to be integrated via a kickstarter, but only if they become free for all users thereafter (considering kickstarter participants as benefactors of sorts, I suppose...).

I didn't make it clear in the initial post, but what I had in mind is exactly what you wrote: once developed, features are available to all users, not just the ones who participated to the kickstarter.

I also agree that some functionality should really be integrated without any need for a kickstarter, but that's a separate topic.