For open source projects with enough usage for any model to work, a coalition of companies that each dedicate some headcount to the project.
I really just don't see how the alternative models capture nearly as much value for the creators of OSS than the salary model.
-
-
If we're really just saying "I can't figure out how to make a unicorn company from OSS" then sure, but stuff like 0L doesn't help there.
-
So you think it’s basically impossible to capture that surplus? No snark intended, genuinely curious.
-
I think that analysis also misses economic value created by people who contribute to OSS and improve their careers.
-
Something generally just seems fishy to me about the pure economic argument. I don't think most OSS is actually created this way.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
A counter example - Sidekiq brings in ~$80k/month (supposedly) to the author. Hard to imagine landing $1m salary at Big Corp for OSS work.
-
These days, that’s a bad month. Companies will pay for good, useful infrastructure, but need to design your project with a business model.
-
Is Sidekiq’s approach (copyleft & selling commercial exceptions w/ add. features) widely applicable? Or uniq to your circumstances?
-
And what do you mean “design w/ biz model”. Is that just picking the right licenses + “pro” features? Or something more?
-
project must be designed for business model, e.g. APIs had to be designed for open core to work, so I could sell extensions.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.