This funding problem is exactly why the nostr:nprofile1qqsggm4l0xs23qfjwnkfwf6fqcs66s3lz637gaxhl4nwd2vtle8rnfqprdmhxue69uhhg6r9vehhyetnwshxummnw3erztnrdakj7qfqwaehxw309ahx7um5wghx26tww4hxg7nhv9h856t89eehqctrv5hsz8rhwden5te0w35x2cmfw3skgetv9ehx7um5wgcjucm0d5hsjmvd7t team is pursuing alternative funding sources beyond grants.
gitworkshop.dev and ngit have benefited greatly from the work you have done: analysis, testing, PM, etc. I am personally very grateful.
sourcing funding for this in nostr may be challenging. Many nostr:npub10pensatlcfwktnvjjw2dtem38n6rvw8g6fv73h84cuacxn4c28eqyfn34f grants are like mine: for 1 dev full-time. Most projects don't have access to a pot of money for this. It would be really nice to have a call-off pot for this and other things such as, the great work nostr:npub149p5act9a5qm9p47elp8w8h3wpwn2d7s2xecw2ygnrxqp4wgsklq9g722q has done on logo design. I wonder though if the Open Source dynamic changes, and an expectation is created, when smaller individual contributions are directly rewarded with money.
Discussion
Yes, overreliance on grants (and especially grants determined by one committee) is hurting the internal marketplace and causing unecessary strife, as we easily predicted months ago (this is just beginners' Austrian economics).
Nostr needs at least _additional_ funding models, including some that might not turn a profit for years.
We have said, from the beginning, that we are interested in establishing the concept of "paying for work" directly, both by demonstratively paying our own suppliers, working for bounties, finding external funding sources by marketing our products, and by requesting payment for our own services through zaps, subscriptions, fees, sales, or etc.
It is a cultural change, we wish to promote.