Really curious if you have an opinion on how to get paid for OSS w/ permissive licenses. Is it just “consult/train/etc”, or something else?
-
-
Replying to @davewasmer @feross
For open source projects with enough usage for any model to work, a coalition of companies that each dedicate some headcount to the project.
1 reply 3 retweets 2 likes -
In order for this to work, companies already have to be invested in the project, and non-permissive licenses work against that goal.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
1: I'd also add that OSS works better when contributors are working on (or closely with) real world applications of the OSS.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
2: So you get benefits from large apps dedicating headcount and staff time to improving the OSS they use.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
3/3: And you don't need every company using the OSS to contribute back in order for this model to work.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
TLDR people drastically undercount the $ in existing allocated headcount when talking about the alleged "open source funding crisis"
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
That approach seems viable - but also seems to let a lot of value generation go uncaptured. Not making an “it’s not fair” argument, but /1
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @davewasmer @feross
btw it's more than viable, it's basically millions upon millions (billions probably) of OSS funding dark matter.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Billions paid out in OSS salaried work? That seems a tad high, but perhaps I’m only seeing the tip of the iceberg
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I am personally aware of tens of millions so I don't think it's that much of a stretch.
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.