- 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.
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.
over the years, using “open source” has become an excuse to avoid paying for software
Um. Yes. And to be blunt: obviously. And in return, I give away software I create for free whether people need it or not, and try to give back in the form of contributions too. But I’ve never once given up my day job for it. Would that be nice? Maybe. But open source software is more frequently sustained by passionate people using and expanding it for their own projects and not by expecting people to pay you for your efforts when you’re likely not paying (nodejs, github, ahem) for the software you’re building it on anyway.
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.
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.
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
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.
As an open source software maintainer myself, I don’t quite agree with some of the points.
I also always believed that if you ever started a project that is valuable for companies, they would support you in return
For me, I do ask for donations, of course, because life is hard and who doesn’t want money? Especially when you deserve it. But I never expect anyone to make a donation. It’s only when someone actually does it that I feel so much happiness. Some leave a thank you comment and stated that they cannot support me financially, and I’m also perfectly happy with that.
All I got was complaints.
I see it as feature requests and bug reports, and are another kind of contribution. Note that some of the people may seem rude, it could be because they are simply bad at English (as am I) and try their best to write a short sentence. Some may not familiar to GitHub and talk about their problems in an unrelated issue. In that case I simply try my best to understand and kindly answer them, and guide them to the right direction.
It may seem to you that open source is great because it’s free to use. Truth is, it certainly is not free.
I use open source software for free, and I want to pay it back by contributing more to open source. I don’t forget that my own open source projects also have a lot of other open source components in them, all for free. I don’t like to force people to pay for my softwares in order to use it.
Of course, my open source projects will forever be hobby projects, I can never make them into a serious business nor work on them full-time, but I’m fine with that.
Very well said. 100% agree - my projects are hobbies that allow me to contribute back for the many OSS I use, with the added bonus of helping me learn/retain knowledge of languages.
I appreciate your attitude about dealing with people. And the other stuff too.
Good thoughts. Did you follow the link to thread that was the tipping point for the blog author? The thread creator was very rude (according to, due to his own mental health situation). We all have different levels of tolerance and patience, but I can totally see why the blog author would be fed up after such a comment, if things were already stressful.
Yes, I’ve just reread it, and while I completely disagree with the issue creator’s attitude, he does have a point:
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
I haven’t verify if this is true of not, but this is just not necessary. If the author stops providing pre-built binary for newer release versions, so be it. But I think it is a little too much aggressive from the author to delete old release versions as well.
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’ve given up on humanity, but not open source for some reason
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 think by far the biggest problem with open source is that the user community fundamentally mis-understands the nature of the transaction involving them and the developer(s) of the software they’re using.
I think if we could make everyone sit down, take 10 minutes and just read The Social Contract Of Open Source a lot of people would keep developing OSS software.
Brass tacks: You are being given a gift. The person who gave you that gift owes you NOTHING because… They gave you a gift and by using their software you chose to accept it.
I see it all the time in the open source project I co-maintain, and I have it SUPER easy beacause ours is really just a bundle of configuration files for Neovim.
Is that contract copyrighted?
Is that contract copyrighted?
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.
That is naive to think that companies will take your shit for free and give you something back in return.
I know a lot of companies even if using your OSS won’t pay for bug fixes etc. It’s really sad.
As shown by a Microsoft employee opening a bug for FFPEG for issues with Teams…
Maybe fix it yourself and contribute or donate to the cause?
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 👍
Good that this developer speaks up. The recent XZ backdoor story is an example of lack of sustainable infrastructure and normalizing of pushing developers.
Good that this developer speaks up. The recent XZ backdoor story is
Is unrelated. XZ is about burnout. This is about some guy saying “I did this thing for free. Where’s my money?”
You gotta have thick skin to be an open source dev. A lot of people will talk to you with an impressively entitled tone, and say very disrespectful things.
I hope this dev can experience the better side of their community more often, and I sincerely hope they can make a living from their project, even if it stays closed source.
I sincerely hope they can make a living from their project
Or someone will fork it and put some time in.
My experience with maintaining open source projects (though mine are very much smaller) is that it’s quite similar to a business: you just have to deal with stakeholders and people who think they are stakeholders.
I had all the same experience at work:
-
Some unknown person from an unrelated team contacted me because something that my team does not manage broke. I tried to help a few times and I suddenly became their personal IT support team.
-
Another time someone not even working at my company demanded that I drop everything and fix their problem, because my name appeared in 3rd parties libraries.
It’s sad that open source authors don’t always receive the recognition that they deserve.
-
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.
What kind of industry or type of solution do those projects solve? That can be a big factor too.
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.
Very much. Thunderbird are receiving like 6M on donations. They simply know how to market and subtlety but assertively advertise their donation requests.
This public issue on the nut.js repo, where I’m publicly accused of something that’s entirely not true was the final nail in the coffin.
Damn FOSS geeks, they ruin FOSS!
