Paying for dev in darktable is the same struggle as funding Wikipedia. Given the number of users, something like 1-2€/year/user would probably secure at least 2 full-time devs. But the web is free, the software is free, so it’s costless in people’s mind.
I have 187 patrons right now, which is quite a lot if you compare to other projects, but going “only” to 500 patrons would leave me a net income equals to minimal (monthly) wage in my country.
It’s not super hard to find devs, there are a bunch around. Convincing some of them to allow perhaps 25% of their working time could be doable if they were paid enough. But for that you need money. And the beautiful thing is that money is out there, I mean we probably have several 100k users and most of them should have a couple of €/$ to spare.
The challenge is yet to educate these 100k users. In rich countries, a pint of beer is around 5-8 €. Most people don’t think too much before buying one to themselves or to friends. Yet, when it’s time to donate to a project that creates value for themselves, most of them get shy or think someone else will provide, so why bother ?
Bother because 100k beers/years make 4 senior/8 junior developers yearly wage, and developer’s yearly work is what you want for the software you use. Even if you don’t know it, you really want that.
If you want quality software, someone competent needs to put in the hours. There is no shortcut to that. Opensource done on spare time looks like what it is : amateur work. Only designing a sensible user interface needs interaction with real users, several iterations of design, a couple of back-and-forth feedback loops… no hobbyist dev has time for that and wants to bother either (that probably reminds him too much of his day job anyway). There is no way to do good software on saturdays evening with devs who don’t feel accountable for their work because it’s a hobby and they didn’t get paid for it. We all know that the biggest flaw of opensource is usually the interface design (or rather, the lack thereof), and the reason is it is really too time-consuming for a hobbyist dev.
So it all falls back to that : do you want to use your pocket money to improve your tools, or not ?
Let me answer that : it’s time to up the opensource game, at least as high as commercial software. Opensource means the code is public, which is good for privacy, long-term availability/compatibility and hackability. It is the only way to do software that will not turn your machine against you anytime soon (hello Cambridge Analytica, and so on).
But in practice, opensource usually means “less good software for which I didn’t pay”, and it really should not have to sum up to that.
Also, “donating” opensource tools gives a chance to the less rich countries and less rich people, because they can first get the tools for free if they cannot afford them, without being withheld by a paywall, then start a commercial activity and perhaps improve their living, and then give back when they can. (That’s me being a hopeless socialist, sorry not sorry, Uncle Sam).
But if you think devs don’t create value for you, then, sure, don’t bother.
PS/Edit : on another note, since opensource doesn’t have owners and shareholders, it doesn’t have to make profit margin, it just has to pay for dev time and their health/retirement insurance. So, paid opensource would actually be much cheaper than your usual corporate software.
Edit 2 : additionally, commercial imaging software is not that good. Sure, they have lots of candy features, AI stuff and auto stuff everywhere, but they are stacked on top of rotten pipelines and 30 years-old design meant for scanned film. Can you guess how many pieces of commercial soft do proper alpha compositing ?