Q2 2019 Survey Results and Call for Proposals

Thanks so much for your support and feedback in the latest survey. We value your opinions and always take suggestions into account as we make changes from quarter to quarter.

Project applications for our Q2 2019 round close on 15th Apr, midnight PST. The selections will be announced shortly afterwards. The Q2 2019 projects will start on May 1.

Survey Responses

There were 56 respondents to the survey, down from 67 in the last survey. The highlights are presented below.

Which Clojure dialects do you regularly use?

• Clojure - 55 (98%)
• ClojureScript - 43 (77%)
• Clojure CLR - 0 (0%)

Which platforms do you target?

• Clojure JVM Server (96%)
• ClojureScript Browser (73%)
• ClojureScript Node Server (10%)
• Clojure JVM Client (13%)
• ClojureScript Desktop Application (13%)

What areas of Clojure would you like to see improvement in?

The main things people were interested in:

• developer experience tools (52%)
• build tooling (43%)
• documentation (43%)
• error messages (39%)
• IDE support (41%)
• test tooling (30%)
• linters (29%)

If you work on any of these kinds of projects, please look at applying for funding.

Are there any particular libraries, tools, or projects that are important to you that you would like to see supported?

shadow-cljs, CIDER, ClojureScript, re-frame, clojure.spec, fulcro, Pathom

If you’re a maintainer of any of these projects, please consider applying.

Have you seen any direct benefits from improvements to the projects we have funded?

About 2/3 of responses have seen direct benefits.

• “Yes, have used Kaocha at work, looks really good. I haven’t used the other libraries so can’t comment.”
• “No… but maybe someday! Aleph is strategic to keep warm because Netty is the sort of project that may suddenly come out with a CVE fix.”
• “Really liked the Neanderthal blog series”
• “Yes I use Figwheel all the time. I’m in the process of using Kaocha as the test runner for all my projects.”

How would you like us to allocate our funding?

75% of respondents wanted us to fund a mix of established and speculative projects, and 25% wanted us to only fund established projects. This is roughly the same as our Q4 2018 survey. In Q1 2019 the mix was 80/20.

What are we doing well, what could we be doing better?

Doing well:

• Communication
• Community Building
• Transparency

Could do better:

• Funding models and exploring different project time amounts
• Update website
• Fund more projects

We’re still looking at ways we can tailor our funding to better match the needs of OSS projects. We were hoping to offer different funding models for our Q2 funding round, but weren’t able to get it ready in time.

If you’d like to see more companies sponsor Clojurists Together, please reach out to them and encourage them to join.

Thanks!