Conversation

Notices

1. jollyrogue (jollyrogue@social.tulsa.ok.us)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Feb-2023 02:13:37 JST jollyrogue

   • Adrian Cochrane
   • R. L. Dane :debian: :openbsd:
   • LisPi
   • Benjamin Hollon
   • Deadly Headshot

   @lispi314 If the long term goal is monetization, it does limit that. Otherwise, there’s not a reason for it. The project can exist as a project.

   I understand proprietary software. They found a problem, and they’re selling a solution. It’s less frustrating then open-core projects honestly.

   Companies need to recognize they need to self insure FOSS projects rather then demand free labor.

   @benjaminhollon @RL_Dane @cobra @alcinnz @dheadshot

   • Adrian Cochrane repeated this.
   • LisPi (lispi314@mastodon.top)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Feb-2023 02:14:13 JST LisPi

     in reply to

     • Adrian Cochrane
     • R. L. Dane :debian: :openbsd:
     • Benjamin Hollon
     • Deadly Headshot

     @jollyrogue @benjaminhollon @RL_Dane @cobra @alcinnz @dheadshot
     Yes of course, and a project can transition from a state lending itself to such a monetization scheme to one where it's effectively impossible to apply it without particular trouble (good luck reaching all yt-dlp contributors, for example).

     Open Core has always felt to me like a precarious balance since the users could very well reimplement the features you're denying them.