> Open source and free are two separate things. When I use the term open source, I mean “OSI license” as that’s what I think is most important. That means free

> Open source and free are two separate things. When I use the term open source, I mean “OSI license” as that’s what I think is most important. That means free. Projects are free to do whatever they want, and choosing a closed source license that’s not free is their prerogative. More power to them. I probably will never buy anything from them, but I harbor no ill will. But when it comes to supporting OSS, I’ll do it as I’ve been for the past few decades; using and contributing to it. Note this is different than “fixing your problems for free” and I’ve funded a shitload of consulting to fix my problems with OSS. I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect a problem to be fixed for free. Just like it’s unreasonable to expect that I must pay certain developers to fix problems in open source. I find it funny when people say things aren’t sustainable and there are 20-50 year old projects and communities that are clearly sustainable and on multiple generations of developers. “Not sustainable for me to do it” is very different from “not sustainable.” It’s ok that not everyone who wants to make a living doing something can’t afford to do it, that’s not a problem we need to solve as a society.