Per https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm_RuObpeGo&app=desktop …, paraphrased: OSS: We don't support .NET 4.0. Company: We run a billion dollar line of business and have to run on .NET 4.0 because that decision is made above me. OSS: Point me to a contribution you've made to any OSS in last month and I will patch.
-
-
"Economic buyer?" The person at a company with authority to approve the purchase of your software license / consulting gig / etc you're going to pitch. Generally not the dev looking at Github in a billion dollar business.
Show this thread -
"Why not talk to that dev?" Nothing to talk about; you wouldn't propose marriage to someone through their cat.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Agreed. To be fair
@SimonCropp is also experimenting with checking folks who raise an issue/PR against the project's Open Collective backers, so they're going down that route too. I'm personally very excited to see this kind of experimentation in OSS! https://twitter.com/SimonCropp/status/1069437826972807169 …pic.twitter.com/jszUx0BFXv
-
just so everyone has full context on that GH issue in question https://github.com/Fody/PropertyChanged/issues/270 …. and yes i could have handled it better. i guess my underlying driver was "consuming FOSS and never contributing back (to any project) does not make u part of the community"
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Your suggestion is entirely sensible and almost obvious which makes me think that a essay on why this isn't already the general modus operandi would be quite interesting.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.