> it would be just some weird variant of proprietary software where you're expected to send patches instead of license fees. Why is this weird? As the author o

> it would be just some weird variant of proprietary software where you're expected to send patches instead of license fees. Why is this weird? As the author of the software, surely I get to decide how I prefer to be compensated? If I'd like patches and user freedom, then your only decision is whether the software is worth that for you. Not whether my license is "weird" or "not open source".