- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
Sustainable open source will stay a dream
You must log in or register to comment.
Why not dual-license?
Copyleft for true FOSS experience or paid option for companies.
This is a pretty good option, though I also think something like what aseprite has done is pretty good too (compile it yourself for free, or pay for a precompiled binary available through e.g. Steam) - from what I can tell this setup is fairly profitable.
uses pushover license
surprised pikachu face when he gets pushed over
every time, folks.
Ah… This guy sounds a bit like a prima dona tbh. This shit is standard fare for all open source projects.
If you can’t handle the heat…
This shouldn’t be the case. Offering the source code of a project to the world is extra work and an act of kindness. We should reward it in kind.
We definitely should reward it, and respect it. But people.are assholes, and that’s not a fixable problem
Not with that attitude
Offering the source code of a project to the world is extra work and an act of kindness. We should reward it in kind.
We should have the option to reward it. We shouldn’t be harangued for not.
Disclosure: I maintained a well-used piece of software for about 10 years, and contributed to other projects as time permitted. I never, ever, wrote a single line of code or email expecting money for any of it. I went into it as a spare-time thing and I stopped when that ran out. I have no compassion for people who just magically expected a wealth of ready donations for whatever they produce. It’s entirely naive. It’s like the beggar yelling at you for not dropping a twenty into the cup.
Sucks to see something destroy a mans spirit. Not only did it change his outlook on creating open source but it soured his view on open source in general. Reads a bit overly salty but, understandable as it sounds like he went through a lot.
I’ve given up on humanity, but not open source for some reason
Fundraising is skill, and it needs to be learnt, I have looked at a fairly large chunk of open source project that are successfully funded and i think that is what sets them apart.
I think it is important that users should have a very clear understanding of how you are doing, if you need X money to keep doing this, there should be a pop up saying you need X money on the software and it should be very hard to miss on the website and read me.
Will some people not like that? probably but you can’t please everyone and you shouldn’t let a vocal minority determines how things happen.
At that point, you’ve become a business. So yeah, you need skill to fundraise.
I think opensource software should always be dual-license. One FOSS for personal use, and an aggressively limited license for commercial use.
Fuck the companies, they will always take and never give anything back. They won’t give you money anyways, so might as well shut them down.
I mean if you want to live off your work, then of course you’re a business.
Or if you want to get money without all the fundraising hassle, get a salaried job.
Basically you want to work in open source on whatever you want, not have to listen to users, not have to find funds, and still be paid for it?
If what you bring has an immense value, like nodejs where pretty much all the internet runs on it, you shouldn’t have to scrap by or need fundraising skills.
At that point, you’ve become a business. So yeah, you need skill to fundraise.
or a non profit, and not surprising running a business or a non profit requires the skills to manage a business or a non profit, iirc the software freedom conservatory and maybe the SPI say the can help with fundraising, but you need to be modest and consider you might benefit from learning from other people.
Fuck the companies, they will always take and never give anything back. They won’t give you money anyways, so might as well shut them down.
That’s just factually wrong, for example most of the contribution to the linux kernel are from companies, blender development fund is a good case study for this (see how much each corporate sponsors pays)
It was a hyperbole that companies never give back, but for every company that donates, how many don’t?
If the companies would give back even a fraction of what they generate by using FOSS, then it would be viable for a lot more people to be a FOSS developer.
What kind of industry or type of solution do those projects solve? That can be a big factor too.
All points in the article are completely valid. We live in a crappy world where all anyone wants to do is take.
SOME of the points in this rant are valid. The conclusions are wrong because the context is wrong.
This guy wanted to get paid for his free software. Sure it’s not free – any more than the miniatures my warhammer-lovin’ cousin painstakingly paints are ‘free’ for his time. Wanting to get magic money compensation, though, is wrong in both cases.
The public issue on github where people are slagging him for maybe expiring some old software; that’s just stupid drama. Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. NO. ONE. CARES. They’re just pissed at the apparent rug-pull and “buy a license” isn’t the best way to be not-a-dick about it.
I do like the solution of the developer. Share the source code for those who want to compile and let those who want packages pay. And very good that the “shouting at open source developers” got some more attention again with this blog post. Too many people wanting to grab and demand but not give anything back. Time for a change!
There are two types of Open Source users; those of us who understand and live by the ethos of FOSS, and users who just want to use a software that they don’t have to pay for and don’t care or understand the underlying ideas behind it.
That second group is the group who, no matter how many times they hear it explained to them, will refuse to believe that “free” doesn’t necessarily mean “no-cost” and therefore develop an expectation of “free” and decry that you’re not allowed to sell your software because it’s open-source, and even asking for donations is forbidden, when in reality neither of those things is remotely true.
Far more important than anything is to change the perception of Open Source to something like value ware; If you value the use you get from the software, pay an amount that you feel is fair. If they can’t afford it, that’s okay, but if they can, then the expectation needs to be that they DO. Even just a few bucks.
Damn
You should do a better job updating your documentation so that people do not waste their time like I did. This change to closed source was announced where, exactly? All of your READMEs and documentation sites do not mention this. Very easy to be confused and very disappointing to me that this went closed-source.
Not only did you sell out, you also removed all the old versions that were released under an open source license so that others couldn’t continue to use out-of-support versions. DISGUSTING.
tl;dr get off GitHub and npm entirely if you want to do the closed-source thing, kthx.
Sorry for this and others. That’s a horrible experience.
And they justified with
I’m having a mental health crisis right now. What I said was wrong, I could not see that a few days ago. Take whatever you want from that. I am sorry. Please stop piling on now that I have removed everything. I am seriously ill and need to stop being involved in anything for several months.
(Leaving the end out as it can be triggering, talking about death)
I don’t know what to make of this.
TBH I felt this is something they made up once it got more attention. If they had felt remorse, they might have come back to apologise or correct their mistake, sometime in the past two weeks I guess.
Who knows maybe they are really ill. Maybe they just made everything up.
Sounds like they’re going through some shit and using toxic online interactions in an effort to try to ameliorate their internal struggles. It reminds me of a wounded animal lashing out.
Doesn’t justify them, but it does give more context so people can respond accordingly.
This kind of entitlement makes one reluctant to even release the source code in the first place.
Then FOSS is not for you. Stop using it.
FOSS is not for me, because I dislike how developers are being harassed? Those people have lives too.
Who’s entitlement is “this entitlement”? It’s a stupid idea to use pronouns in an opening comment, especially when you’re adding little extra.
I’m not saying it doesn’t suck for this person, but product market fit is a thing for open source too. If people need it they’ll use it and contribute until something better comes along. If not, your idea wasn’t the one. That doesn’t mean it’s not possible. Nearly my whole life runs on open source software, so it’s pretty clearly sustainable.
To be honest it has always been this way. Especially when we were talking about “Free Software”, and open source was in part a way that it was free as in freedom, not free as in doesn’t cost anything.
Of course the term open source didn’t change anything, because if you look at the definition of open source, you’re allowed to share it so obviously you’ll be able to get a copy for free.
And uesst what, not having to pay is such a big difference that’s what people remember.
Then they started complaining that the image search plugin was not compatible with Apple Silicon.
What kind of psycho fucking does this.
You have no idea. I once did an open source library that became somewhat popular and shit like that made me give it away to a consulting company that will happily attach a quote to the bullshit requests.
As in my case it was a library I also got the university students demanding I do their homework for them, which is another delightful group.
Unfortunately, college kids are still very much kids, even if they’re over 18. Which means a lot of them are dicks.
…I fucking hate teenagers.
Apparently Mac users.
I dont blame em for going with that decision. Maintainer/devs are also wearing customer service/ PR and bookeeping hat on top of the things they build. Things cost money, especially time, call it greedy or not but people have to pay housing and food. Its tough and similar to a lot of industries, nobody cares until something goes wrong. All the best to this person 👍
Removed by mod
FOSS is barely surviving due to passion
How it started: passion
How it’s going: passion
Hate to see this, but there are definitely people who are takers and have the nerve to be entitled at the same time.
- You, as an open source maintainer owe nothing to anyone. Never feel compelled to do anything in your project that doesn’t make you happy.
- you should 100% be able to charge for your work. I applaud you for that.
- There are more of us out here who want to support open source int he right way. Know that.
- thank you for the project you made and shared. Truly.
While I can fully understand his pain, I can’t quite follow how adding a paid subscription model will make his life easier (except financially).
Before, he had to deal with entitled asshats, and now he’ll have to deal with asshats feeling even more entitled, because they paid for it.
With the subscription they can focus on the Pareto optimization. 20% of the subscribers will be causing 80% of the entitled asshattery. Drop those, focus on features, raise prices, keep the good contracts. This software looks like a good fit for enterprise spending tens of thousands to get a support contract.
It sounds like the repo is still up and open and they just aren’t going to deal with unpaid work packaging it up and managing idiots whining about it? Good for them, I honestly don’t have any complaints with this.
I’ve oddly seen people be more entitled to free things then things they pay for. There is now a legal entitlement for these people now though
