3 ms·
And lots do. Top 20 sponsored contributions from 01/01/2016 up to now sorted by number of commits (not the best metric, but still) 1031 The FreeBSD Foundatio
by gonzoua 10y ago
And lots do. Top 20 sponsored contributions from 01/01/2016 up to now sorted by number of commits (not the best metric, but still)
1031 The FreeBSD Foundation
888 EMC / Isilon Storage Division
379 Microsoft OSTC
339 Microsoft
297 Solarflare Communications, Inc.
277 Dell EMC Isilon
221 DARPA, AFRL
170 Mellanox Technologies
144 Chelsio Communications
128 ABT Systems Ltd
90 Spectra Logic Corp
88 HEIF5
70 Cavium
58 Smartcom - Bulgaria AD
57 Stormshield
48 Netflix
45 Rubicon Communications, LLC (Netgate)
42 Multiplay
38 ScaleEngine Inc.
35 Citrix Systems R&D
- pjmlp 10y agoStill a minority compared with the GNU/Linux contributions, but nice to see some do actually care. "The Trouble with FreeBSD" @ 43:20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib7tFvw34DM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib7tFvw34DM
- gonzoua 10y agoLess companies contribute to FreeBSD because its market share is lower than the one of Linux. And I believe first part of Beno's answer is correct - it's because FreeBSD version of RedHat didn't happened at the right moment. RedHat was there when window of opportunity opened for open source OS and was able to boost linux ecosystem by paying Linux developers which led to higher adoption which led to more contributions from corporate world. GPL does not require contributions. GPL requires access to sources. Not to changes history, only sources. Contributions happen because it's more profitable for company (in long run) to participate in community and influence development than to be a passive actor. My point is: license has very little to do with market share in this case. It's more about being good enough and having certain amount of luck when the right moment arives.