3 ms·

> does not make them any less free to you Of course not, but it does make them unencumbered. And I'm not complaining. I'm just saying that's cost (i.e. not f

• brandonbloom 10y ago
  If you take the stance of "nothing is free", then the word "free" isn't particularly useful.
  • jgalt212 10y ago
    A+ extreme reductionism. I never said "nothing is free", nor implied that, but merely that users need to cognizant of the goals of "free" language maintainers (especially when there is a corporation rather than a person as BDFL) that do not necessarily align with the goals of the median or average user. Now that we are on this topic, I'm starting to think maybe it's worth paying for a programming language so that the goals of the maintainers are better aligned with the goals of the users. That being said, there is real value to the ability inspect the source. As such, it's very difficult to do open source as a paid product.
    • calibraxis 10y ago
      There is a history here. Please read: 1. https://web.archive.org/web/20100220100027/http://clojure.org/funding https://web.archive.org/web/20100220100027/http://clojure.or... 2. https://web.archive.org/web/20140704050611/http://clojure.org/funding https://web.archive.org/web/20140704050611/http://clojure.or... My own interpretation: programmer culture has such problems that someone actually considered corporate funding healthier than user donations.
      • snaky 10y ago
        There are many definitions of the term 'healthier'. But the links are pretty amusing. And now we have a first fork https://github.com/jaunt-lang/jaunt https://github.com/jaunt-lang/jaunt