this post was submitted on 06 May 2024
50 points (90.3% liked)

Open Source

33240 readers
293 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There has been a lot of talk about companies and individuals adopting licenses that aren't OSI opensource to protect themselves from mega-corp leechers. Developers have also been condemned who put donation notices in the command-line or during package installation. Projects with opensource cores and paid extensions have also been targets of vitriol.

So, let's say we wanted to make it possible for the majority of developers to work on software that strictly follows the definition of opensource, which models would be acceptable to make enough money to work on those projects full-time?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Deckweiss 23 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (9 children)

Personally I like the following two approaches:

  1. Free and open source for selfhosting, paid when hosted by the company (e.g Nextcloud, gitea, cal.com)

  2. Free and open source with basic features, paid for proprietary business addons (e.g Portmaster, Xpipe)


I think those approaches are fully compatible with the open source definition, but please correct me if I am wrong. (The examples I mentioned are just some of which I personally know and use, but of course they are many others)

[–] [email protected] 19 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (7 children)

I would add:

  1. Paid 24/7 support
  2. Pay for custom features
  3. Accept donations
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)