They only spend money on some minor infrastructure to have JIRA and the mailing lists and build servers running; plus administrative / legal personnel.
All the new "Apache" software is written by volunteers, the mirror system is provided free by 3rd parties, code hosting is almost all on GitHub.
So, what would they need the extra money for? Another JIRA instance?
By comparison the FreeBSD foundation does hand out grants to fix parts of their OS which they deem relevant and in need. Would be nice to see something similar in other foundations.
So, the answer is that nothing exist.
Out of the given options a few also don't qualify (like I mentioned, Apache for sure, opensource.org most likely) because they don't spend money on software development at all.
Why isn't there a public open-source fund [...]
I know it doesn't exist. The non-existence thereof was what prompted that question. I have no idea what point you're attempting to make.
I do apologise for replying to you. If only HN would have a feature to block me from replying to you in the future.
GPS, GSM, fiber optics, Internet, touchscreens, semiconductors, satellites, most of chemistry and aviation - all were researched and developed using taxpayer money.
And it took billions.
Now all public R&D is being destroyed and yet FLOSS fits exactly in the category.
We desperately need large, global, R&D funding not some people throwing some bucks at patreon.
And if you want this thing, why don’t you make it?
I don't make it because I don't work in the software industry and don't have access to large social or financial capital networks. That sounds a bit like asking why someone who proposes a public policy idea doesn't just run for President.
Reciprocity means the producer/upkeeper and consumer each put something into the commons that balances out mutual needs. if only a few people can create or maintain, the many users must contribute in a lesser fashion to enable them.
Equality means that everyone create or maintain, so the burden isn't shared on a small group. If we are all farmers, we can each handle a share of a common field.
But this kind of commons is asymmetrical, and that's why you'll never see people pay the bills anywhere near close to the need. This kind of common can really only be noblesse oblige, where people with abundant resources give charity. It isn't, so people struggle.
Assume the thing has exactly one owner. Then "reciprocity" and "equality" are addressed by the owner charging a fee to use the thing. Currency exchanged by consumers compensates the owner-operator's work.
Donate money to projects you care about. Persuade your friends to donate.
> I don't make it because I don't work in the software industry and don't have access to large social or financial capital networks.
What’s the plan for getting the doers onboard? Pay them? Persuade them to work for free? Persuade the government to tax someone else to fund them?
Or are we just shouting about things we don’t like? Because let me tell you about low quality leather goods...
Since you know this as well as I do, I want to ask: what is your motive in asking this question?
> what is your motive in asking this question?
To provoke OP into debugging me.