18 ms·

I'm working on open source full time

406 points by asicsp 5y ago

Tycho 5y ago
Is working full-time on open source software (if you’re good) for free or for a meagre stipend the most effective altruism there is? When you consider multiplier effects.
- willm 5y ago
  I'm sure its not. But this is one of the few (possibly only) things I'm actually good at. And it's not entirely altruistic, I think this work will benefit me financially in the future.
  - ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
    Good luck! I used to say "My dream is to work for free." At the time, I earned my keep as a manager, and had to do all my coding as extracurricular open-source projects (I've been writing open source for over 20 years). I am now living the dream. A few years ago, I was basically forced into early retirement, and it's the best thing that ever happened to me. I manage to keep busy: https://stackoverflow.com/story/chrismarshall https://stackoverflow.com/story/chrismarshall
- sidlls 5y ago
  Not really, no: it isn't even a very high quality act, and in fact can be quite negative: 1. The multiplier is net negative for software engineers: it advances the commoditization of our knowledge skills; 2. It does so while providing essentially free labor for large organizations with agendas that are rarely positive for society; 3. Most (>99.99%) software development is not similar to, say, mathematical, engineering or scientific inquiry: there's no similar value produced for society by working on it (open source or otherwise), and people who work on open source now thinking they're following the traditions of the hackers of 30-40 years ago are quite mistaken (see above two items) most of the time Some open source software projects are altruistic. The vast overwhelming majority are not.
  - hyproxia 5y ago
    >The multiplier is net negative for software engineers Good. >It does so while providing essentially free labor for large organizations with agendas that are rarely positive for society And? The only downside that I can see is that corporations might take your work without providing their modifications back. Copyleft licenses mitigate this issue.
  - coliveira 5y ago
    This. I wonder why more people don't understand the negative effects of open source (at least in the way it is practiced). It is essentially free labor for Apple, Amazon, and pretty much any big company that already understood how to use open source to get the benefits for their paid products.
    - dgb23 5y ago
      Doesn't that kind of depend on the license?
    - sidlls 5y ago
      Because it's the "nerdy" software engineers' version of social media: a way to exercise some ego/narcissism.
      - trutannus 5y ago
        > a way to exercise some ego/narcissism Alright, then how do you explain the folks who have completely anonymous open source contributor identities? Or folks who commit documentation improvements? I think flattening the entire open source world down to ego and narcissism is reductive to the point of being wrong.
        sidlls 5y ago
        You've set up a fine strawman to burn down: I never even implied what you suggest.
corpMaverick 5y ago
We need better ways to fund Open Source projects. We all benefit tremendously by them. I think, this is one way it can work. Companies pledge to donate $X USD amount per year per software engineer (SE) to a foundation (or whatever legal entity). Then each SE is able to choose which percentage of the money goes to which projects. Channeling the money to the projects that they themselves find more useful. It makes sense because companies benefit but it is the SEs that know what they are using most.
- mattbk1 5y ago
  As articulated four years ago: https://gratipay.news/your-company-should-probably-pay-2000-per-person-for-open-source-9205443e209d https://gratipay.news/your-company-should-probably-pay-2000-...
  - kosasbest 5y ago
    RIP Gratipay: https://gratipay.news/the-end-cbfba8f50981 https://gratipay.news/the-end-cbfba8f50981
- otoburb 5y ago
  Tidelift[1] is one such approach to encourage cashflows in a sustainable manner for open source projects. [1] https://tidelift.com/ https://tidelift.com/
  - yoyohello13 5y ago
    I love the idea of tidelift, and wish I could convince my org to use them. Unfortunately, $1500/month is pretty steep. It's a hard sell when competitors are an order of magnitude cheaper.
- kosasbest 5y ago
  Well there's a few services to help[0], and I see many Github projects with a link in the readme asking for donations and such. But then the project is basically `donationware` and the income is unreliable. I think we need more /reliable/ streams of income instead of digital panhandling. [0] https://www.buymeacoffee.com/ https://www.buymeacoffee.com/ [0] https://www.patreon.com/ https://www.patreon.com/ [0] https://liberapay.com/ https://liberapay.com/
epberry 5y ago
Exciting stuff, congrats. One note, the sponsor link on PyFilesystem is broken, https://github.com/PyFilesystem/pyfilesystem2 https://github.com/PyFilesystem/pyfilesystem2
- willm 5y ago
  Well spotted. Fixed.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
hyproxia 5y ago
>I recently came to a decision which will have a big impact on my open source work. In particular Rich Why does a library for displaying pretty text on the terminal need a full time maintainer?
- krono 5y ago
  And for the whole story: > In particular Rich and Textual, but also pyfilesystem and lomond > In addition to working on Rich and Textual, [...] contribute to open source in other ways. [...] code reviews to open source projects His focus seems to be mostly on Textual, which looks pretty neat.
- capableweb 5y ago
  https://github.com/willmcgugan/rich https://github.com/willmcgugan/rich > Rich is a Python library for rich text and beautiful formatting in the terminal. > The Rich API makes it easy to add color and style to terminal output. Rich can also render pretty tables, progress bars, markdown, syntax highlighted source code, tracebacks, and more — out of the box. Seems Rich is not just displaying pretty text, it seems to almost be a full blown UI library that can render components and more. Since the API surface is that big, it's possible for bugs to slip through, and those have to be fixed by someone. Then once companies and other people start depending on this library, they start being dependent on fixes to also be made to it as new platforms appear, new terminals get written and so on. Either the companies/people can start contributing their fixes directly upstream, or the can fund one person who can do it for them, and for other users of the library. Although most of us know what happens in situations like this: no one except the original author actually fixes stuff, until the author looses interests and moves on.
- seoaeu 5y ago
  One of the most baffling things about HN is how commenters routinely and wildly underestimate the amount of resources it takes to build high quality software
Datenstrom 5y ago
One interesting open source funding method I stumbled on recently was Tidelift which I posted recently[1]. Otherwise I see contributing to open source as essential for my company and we are still quite small but already have one dev that has been full time supporting a critical open source project for about 6 months. I'm not sure why others don't see it that way. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28487153 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28487153 Edit: Just realized he develops the package that lead me to discovering Tidelift, small world.
relaunched 5y ago
I would hate to see the future of open source go the way of the open core model. Open source has become a very popular way for startups to get traction and lead gen, for their revenue generating, fully-featured, open-core version. I understand why this exists, and there's nothing wrong with it, but I'd love a Richard Stallman rant on the subject. I think it would be a good idea for open-core startups to grant options to EFF or the equivalent, at the beginning. I'd very much like to see the community directly benefit from the corporations that bootstrap themselves off of the communities back.
- dimal 5y ago
  I gotta admit, I like the open core model. When it's done right, it seems like a reasonable way to monetize while still getting development done and encouraging a community and ecosystem. I've been looking at how Ghost[0] set things up[1] and it seems to be working very well. The company is non-profit and has certain restrictions in place to ensure that they don't become evil. Still, it won't work for everything and it can't work for smaller libraries. [0] https://ghost.org/ https://ghost.org/ [1] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/johnonolan/ghost-just-a-blogging-platform https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/johnonolan/ghost-just-a...
  - IshKebab 5y ago
    I agree. Open core is the least objectionable way to deal with the fact that properly developing most open source projects costs money. Obviously there are exceptions (Firefox, popular programming languages, etc.). I especially like that you can often put enterprisey features like LDAP integration and auditing into the "paid" bit which gives a nice way to encourage companies to pay without affecting hobbyists.
  - relaunched 5y ago
    for me, nothing about open source is practical, reasonable or makes sense... and that's why it's magical. Software, as an industry may have evolved past that naive stage. It just kinda makes me a little sad.
mlang23 5y ago
The title made it already clear that this is an instance of "I am fighting the good fight, so please give me your money." I am an open source/FLOSS enthusiast since 25 years, but such calls still sound pathetic to me. These days even more then 10 years ago. Its a bit like going "I volunteer as an ambulance driver, do you have a few dollars?" I can see that some people dream of becoming financially independent from just coding open source. I have dreams as well. But the truth is, only a very select few ever reach that point. Joey Hess with git-annex comes to mind. I guess he just hit a nail at the right time, and wrote something that many people actually use. But if you're just that tad below the "everyone knows your tool"-line, you will never ever make your living from donations.
- shadycuz 5y ago
  I didn't get this vibe. I read through like 3 or 4 pagaraphs and money was never mentioned.
  - Miiko 5y ago
    You shouldn't stop reading - they are mentioned in 5th paragraph, literally (as in "income" and "savings")
- Honno 5y ago
  The dudes got savings and career to fallback on—he might be dreaming but it's not like it'll hurt to try. Not to mention he's already popular in Python circles (i.e. tech workers with disposable income) and has an existing group of sponsors.
- willm 5y ago
  Sounds like you only read the title. The OP is planning on living off his savings for a while. I'm sure he would love for sponsorship to make his work self-sustaining, but he would settle for paying a few bills.
- echelon 5y ago
  This is shifting rapidly. We are not living 25 years ago. Kickstarter initiated a trend of paying for things we want by funding people that are creating in our niche areas of interest. Platforms like Patreon and Ko-fi let you support the creators you want directly. You can do it on a subscription basis and have a 1:1 channel to talk with the creator. You can get custom work, support, advice, etc. Github introduced recurring donations directly on user pages, making it seamless to contribute to open source creators. I chip in $5-30/mo to my favorite projects. I'm not the only one doing this, and the money adds up. Twitch and YouTube introduced subscriptions, bits, and channel points, which gamify contributions and make you feel involved. These have resulted in a massive windfall for creators, and that same technique will propagate into open source. "Get your name in the README", etc., distributed on millions of machines is a compelling technique. The world is changing.
coding123 5y ago
Rich looks incredible. I wish I had known about it about a year ago (and was more proficient in Python which I am now). I was creating an app to manage running all of our companies microservices locally on our laptops. I started out with ink-react (a text renderer for console apps that uses React). It was pretty cool in concept, but in execution it couldn't line up large boxes correctly and often failed. I don't know if it fixed all those issues. Instead I just moved to Electron and now my app is a huge motherf__ing beast.
nyc_pizzadev 5y ago
Having worked in a few open source based commercial businesses, I think the donation model can be tough and unpredictable. The only time I have seen it work is when businesses have commercialized an open source project and then give you a decent recurring donation back in return for your support. So the obvious move would be to just commercialize it yourself. The author does mention this at the end. If its a small product but with a lot of users, think about a small add on service in the few dollars a month range. If its a more sophisticated product that's a bit more framework oriented, maybe use it as the foundation for project based services and build a consultancy. If its a true product that can be sold, then make a commercial version and start selling it. A lot of times there is a vast vast market out there that doesn't know this is a free open source project, they just see a product which solves their problems and they buy it.
mtnGoat 5y ago
FOSS is strange to me, some are trying hard to raise money to fund open source, while others appear to be asleep at the wheel. I have reached out to one large project we use a lot at work, multiple times, looking to make a donation, never heard anything back. I guess some are doing so well they don't need any money?
- amatecha 5y ago
  I wonder if for some people there's the aspect of, once they receive money, they have to deal with extra complexity for income tax and whatnot? Just a guess, only thing I could think of (other than, like you say, pre-existing financial stability)...
- IshKebab 5y ago
  Accepting money can be a pain. Now you have to do accounts and taxes, and possibly argue about who actually gets the money and what it is used for. I can see why some projects might not care about small donations. Maybe try offering a few million and see what happens. :-)
- matkoniecz 5y ago
  I would start from projects looking for money and providing way to gave them (I bet that at least one heavily used FOSS project matches that description). > some are trying hard to raise money to fund open source, while others I am not so surprised by diversity here
platz 5y ago
> The end-goal with Textual is to make it the best way to create applications in the terminal (with Python or any other language). how would this be able to support languages other than python?
- tobr 5y ago
  I’m not sure that’s how you should read it. It can be a better way to create a terminal application than any other way you can do it in any language, and still be limited to Python.
rikroots 5y ago
I've just dedicated the best part of 2.5 years to working on my open source project[1] almost full-time. During that time I've managed to rewrite the entire library from scratch, discover a new purpose for its existence and (very selfishly) have a lot of fun with the library, pushing its boundaries and re-evaluating its 'API' as I discovered/explored the world of generative art. Sadly my personal funds have run out and I've not been successful finding sponsors etc. But the work has helped me land a new/exciting full-time job so I've wasted nothing through my endeavour. I wish Will McGugan all the best at the start of his adventure, and hope he has as much fun as I've had over the next year or two! [1] - https://github.com/KaliedaRik/Scrawl-canvas https://github.com/KaliedaRik/Scrawl-canvas
intricatedetail 5y ago
The problem with open source is that is over represented by privileged people, who have resources to work on it instead of having to have paying job. If you are poor, you have limited chances to contribute anything and thus also potentially getting worse jobs due to no OSS contributions in CV.
- Nbox9 5y ago
  The benefit of open source is that anyone can contribute, thus someone that cannot afford a university degree or does not have the social network that comes with high status can still prove their skill as a software engineer and find a high paying job.
  - intricatedetail 5y ago
    But how can they do that if they need to work for money? Exposure doesn't pay bills. Money is a barrier.
    - Nbox9 5y ago
      It’s just another door into the profession, one that is honestly more accessible than many others. We cannot remove all barriers to being a software engineer, because people have to learn the skills somewhere.
ww520 5y ago
Governments can encourage donation to OSS projects by structuring favorable tax code for donation like R&D credit.
stocknoob 5y ago
People are coming up with crazy workarounds for funding. Taxes, subscriptions, government programs, begging profit-driven corporations to donate… As programmers in a lucrative field, you can get financial independence (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/ https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-si...). Then you can work on whatever you want without hoping for the rest of the world to change so you can pursue your passions.
tambourine_man 5y ago
I had no idea you could drive 60fps animations in the terminal. How’s that even possible? I only had limited experience with curses ages ago. Is he just spewing control characters crazy fast and the terminal is keeping up fine? Anyway, this guy is a genius and I hope the funding goes well. His other projects look amazing as well. If I were a betting man, I’d wager the browser is the minimum common denominator, not the terminal. But I’d like to live in such a world.
- AlexAndScripts 5y ago
  Hardware accelerated terminals have been around for a while.
  - tambourine_man 5y ago
    I thought it was scrolling that’s was hardware accelerated. How do you hardware accelerate control characters?
vermaden 5y ago
"I'm working on open source full time" - writing that from a Mac ... :D
causehealth101 5y ago
I have a dumb question, tangentially related to this: Can you set up a non-profit as long as fees and/or donations are limited to expenses (not compensation)?
egberts1 5y ago
Minimum Financial Compensation License. Thou shall contribute before using. ——— - Don’t have to say how much. - Only individuals may request anonymity - May post donor list (good for the shaming larger corporation or well-endowed benefactors/benefitees) - Profit!

406 points by asicsp 5y ago

Is working full-time on open source software (if you’re good) for free or for a meagre stipend the most effective altruism there is? When you consider multiplier effects.

willm 5y ago
I'm sure its not. But this is one of the few (possibly only) things I'm actually good at. And it's not entirely altruistic, I think this work will benefit me financially in the future.
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
  Good luck! I used to say "My dream is to work for free." At the time, I earned my keep as a manager, and had to do all my coding as extracurricular open-source projects (I've been writing open source for over 20 years). I am now living the dream. A few years ago, I was basically forced into early retirement, and it's the best thing that ever happened to me. I manage to keep busy: https://stackoverflow.com/story/chrismarshall https://stackoverflow.com/story/chrismarshall
sidlls 5y ago
Not really, no: it isn't even a very high quality act, and in fact can be quite negative: 1. The multiplier is net negative for software engineers: it advances the commoditization of our knowledge skills; 2. It does so while providing essentially free labor for large organizations with agendas that are rarely positive for society; 3. Most (>99.99%) software development is not similar to, say, mathematical, engineering or scientific inquiry: there's no similar value produced for society by working on it (open source or otherwise), and people who work on open source now thinking they're following the traditions of the hackers of 30-40 years ago are quite mistaken (see above two items) most of the time Some open source software projects are altruistic. The vast overwhelming majority are not.
- hyproxia 5y ago
  >The multiplier is net negative for software engineers Good. >It does so while providing essentially free labor for large organizations with agendas that are rarely positive for society And? The only downside that I can see is that corporations might take your work without providing their modifications back. Copyleft licenses mitigate this issue.
- coliveira 5y ago
  This. I wonder why more people don't understand the negative effects of open source (at least in the way it is practiced). It is essentially free labor for Apple, Amazon, and pretty much any big company that already understood how to use open source to get the benefits for their paid products.
  - dgb23 5y ago
    Doesn't that kind of depend on the license?
  - sidlls 5y ago
    Because it's the "nerdy" software engineers' version of social media: a way to exercise some ego/narcissism.
    - trutannus 5y ago
      > a way to exercise some ego/narcissism Alright, then how do you explain the folks who have completely anonymous open source contributor identities? Or folks who commit documentation improvements? I think flattening the entire open source world down to ego and narcissism is reductive to the point of being wrong.
      - sidlls 5y ago
        You've set up a fine strawman to burn down: I never even implied what you suggest.

corpMaverick 5y ago

We need better ways to fund Open Source projects. We all benefit tremendously by them. I think, this is one way it can work. Companies pledge to donate $X USD amount per year per software engineer (SE) to a foundation (or whatever legal entity). Then each SE is able to choose which percentage of the money goes to which projects. Channeling the money to the projects that they themselves find more useful. It makes sense because companies benefit but it is the SEs that know what they are using most.

mattbk1 5y ago
As articulated four years ago: https://gratipay.news/your-company-should-probably-pay-2000-per-person-for-open-source-9205443e209d https://gratipay.news/your-company-should-probably-pay-2000-...
- kosasbest 5y ago
  RIP Gratipay: https://gratipay.news/the-end-cbfba8f50981 https://gratipay.news/the-end-cbfba8f50981
otoburb 5y ago
Tidelift[1] is one such approach to encourage cashflows in a sustainable manner for open source projects. [1] https://tidelift.com/ https://tidelift.com/
- yoyohello13 5y ago
  I love the idea of tidelift, and wish I could convince my org to use them. Unfortunately, $1500/month is pretty steep. It's a hard sell when competitors are an order of magnitude cheaper.
kosasbest 5y ago
Well there's a few services to help[0], and I see many Github projects with a link in the readme asking for donations and such. But then the project is basically `donationware` and the income is unreliable. I think we need more /reliable/ streams of income instead of digital panhandling. [0] https://www.buymeacoffee.com/ https://www.buymeacoffee.com/ [0] https://www.patreon.com/ https://www.patreon.com/ [0] https://liberapay.com/ https://liberapay.com/

epberry 5y ago

Exciting stuff, congrats. One note, the sponsor link on PyFilesystem is broken, https://github.com/PyFilesystem/pyfilesystem2 https://github.com/PyFilesystem/pyfilesystem2

willm 5y ago
Well spotted. Fixed.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

hyproxia 5y ago

>I recently came to a decision which will have a big impact on my open source work. In particular Rich Why does a library for displaying pretty text on the terminal need a full time maintainer?

krono 5y ago
And for the whole story: > In particular Rich and Textual, but also pyfilesystem and lomond > In addition to working on Rich and Textual, [...] contribute to open source in other ways. [...] code reviews to open source projects His focus seems to be mostly on Textual, which looks pretty neat.
capableweb 5y ago
https://github.com/willmcgugan/rich https://github.com/willmcgugan/rich > Rich is a Python library for rich text and beautiful formatting in the terminal. > The Rich API makes it easy to add color and style to terminal output. Rich can also render pretty tables, progress bars, markdown, syntax highlighted source code, tracebacks, and more — out of the box. Seems Rich is not just displaying pretty text, it seems to almost be a full blown UI library that can render components and more. Since the API surface is that big, it's possible for bugs to slip through, and those have to be fixed by someone. Then once companies and other people start depending on this library, they start being dependent on fixes to also be made to it as new platforms appear, new terminals get written and so on. Either the companies/people can start contributing their fixes directly upstream, or the can fund one person who can do it for them, and for other users of the library. Although most of us know what happens in situations like this: no one except the original author actually fixes stuff, until the author looses interests and moves on.
seoaeu 5y ago
One of the most baffling things about HN is how commenters routinely and wildly underestimate the amount of resources it takes to build high quality software

Datenstrom 5y ago

One interesting open source funding method I stumbled on recently was Tidelift which I posted recently[1]. Otherwise I see contributing to open source as essential for my company and we are still quite small but already have one dev that has been full time supporting a critical open source project for about 6 months. I'm not sure why others don't see it that way. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28487153 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28487153 Edit: Just realized he develops the package that lead me to discovering Tidelift, small world.

relaunched 5y ago

I would hate to see the future of open source go the way of the open core model. Open source has become a very popular way for startups to get traction and lead gen, for their revenue generating, fully-featured, open-core version. I understand why this exists, and there's nothing wrong with it, but I'd love a Richard Stallman rant on the subject. I think it would be a good idea for open-core startups to grant options to EFF or the equivalent, at the beginning. I'd very much like to see the community directly benefit from the corporations that bootstrap themselves off of the communities back.

dimal 5y ago
I gotta admit, I like the open core model. When it's done right, it seems like a reasonable way to monetize while still getting development done and encouraging a community and ecosystem. I've been looking at how Ghost[0] set things up[1] and it seems to be working very well. The company is non-profit and has certain restrictions in place to ensure that they don't become evil. Still, it won't work for everything and it can't work for smaller libraries. [0] https://ghost.org/ https://ghost.org/ [1] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/johnonolan/ghost-just-a-blogging-platform https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/johnonolan/ghost-just-a...
- IshKebab 5y ago
  I agree. Open core is the least objectionable way to deal with the fact that properly developing most open source projects costs money. Obviously there are exceptions (Firefox, popular programming languages, etc.). I especially like that you can often put enterprisey features like LDAP integration and auditing into the "paid" bit which gives a nice way to encourage companies to pay without affecting hobbyists.
- relaunched 5y ago
  for me, nothing about open source is practical, reasonable or makes sense... and that's why it's magical. Software, as an industry may have evolved past that naive stage. It just kinda makes me a little sad.

mlang23 5y ago

The title made it already clear that this is an instance of "I am fighting the good fight, so please give me your money." I am an open source/FLOSS enthusiast since 25 years, but such calls still sound pathetic to me. These days even more then 10 years ago. Its a bit like going "I volunteer as an ambulance driver, do you have a few dollars?" I can see that some people dream of becoming financially independent from just coding open source. I have dreams as well. But the truth is, only a very select few ever reach that point. Joey Hess with git-annex comes to mind. I guess he just hit a nail at the right time, and wrote something that many people actually use. But if you're just that tad below the "everyone knows your tool"-line, you will never ever make your living from donations.

shadycuz 5y ago
I didn't get this vibe. I read through like 3 or 4 pagaraphs and money was never mentioned.
- Miiko 5y ago
  You shouldn't stop reading - they are mentioned in 5th paragraph, literally (as in "income" and "savings")
Honno 5y ago
The dudes got savings and career to fallback on—he might be dreaming but it's not like it'll hurt to try. Not to mention he's already popular in Python circles (i.e. tech workers with disposable income) and has an existing group of sponsors.
willm 5y ago
Sounds like you only read the title. The OP is planning on living off his savings for a while. I'm sure he would love for sponsorship to make his work self-sustaining, but he would settle for paying a few bills.
echelon 5y ago
This is shifting rapidly. We are not living 25 years ago. Kickstarter initiated a trend of paying for things we want by funding people that are creating in our niche areas of interest. Platforms like Patreon and Ko-fi let you support the creators you want directly. You can do it on a subscription basis and have a 1:1 channel to talk with the creator. You can get custom work, support, advice, etc. Github introduced recurring donations directly on user pages, making it seamless to contribute to open source creators. I chip in $5-30/mo to my favorite projects. I'm not the only one doing this, and the money adds up. Twitch and YouTube introduced subscriptions, bits, and channel points, which gamify contributions and make you feel involved. These have resulted in a massive windfall for creators, and that same technique will propagate into open source. "Get your name in the README", etc., distributed on millions of machines is a compelling technique. The world is changing.

coding123 5y ago

Rich looks incredible. I wish I had known about it about a year ago (and was more proficient in Python which I am now). I was creating an app to manage running all of our companies microservices locally on our laptops. I started out with ink-react (a text renderer for console apps that uses React). It was pretty cool in concept, but in execution it couldn't line up large boxes correctly and often failed. I don't know if it fixed all those issues. Instead I just moved to Electron and now my app is a huge motherf__ing beast.

nyc_pizzadev 5y ago

Having worked in a few open source based commercial businesses, I think the donation model can be tough and unpredictable. The only time I have seen it work is when businesses have commercialized an open source project and then give you a decent recurring donation back in return for your support. So the obvious move would be to just commercialize it yourself. The author does mention this at the end. If its a small product but with a lot of users, think about a small add on service in the few dollars a month range. If its a more sophisticated product that's a bit more framework oriented, maybe use it as the foundation for project based services and build a consultancy. If its a true product that can be sold, then make a commercial version and start selling it. A lot of times there is a vast vast market out there that doesn't know this is a free open source project, they just see a product which solves their problems and they buy it.

mtnGoat 5y ago

FOSS is strange to me, some are trying hard to raise money to fund open source, while others appear to be asleep at the wheel. I have reached out to one large project we use a lot at work, multiple times, looking to make a donation, never heard anything back. I guess some are doing so well they don't need any money?

amatecha 5y ago
I wonder if for some people there's the aspect of, once they receive money, they have to deal with extra complexity for income tax and whatnot? Just a guess, only thing I could think of (other than, like you say, pre-existing financial stability)...
IshKebab 5y ago
Accepting money can be a pain. Now you have to do accounts and taxes, and possibly argue about who actually gets the money and what it is used for. I can see why some projects might not care about small donations. Maybe try offering a few million and see what happens. :-)
matkoniecz 5y ago
I would start from projects looking for money and providing way to gave them (I bet that at least one heavily used FOSS project matches that description). > some are trying hard to raise money to fund open source, while others I am not so surprised by diversity here

platz 5y ago

> The end-goal with Textual is to make it the best way to create applications in the terminal (with Python or any other language). how would this be able to support languages other than python?

tobr 5y ago
I’m not sure that’s how you should read it. It can be a better way to create a terminal application than any other way you can do it in any language, and still be limited to Python.

rikroots 5y ago

I've just dedicated the best part of 2.5 years to working on my open source project[1] almost full-time. During that time I've managed to rewrite the entire library from scratch, discover a new purpose for its existence and (very selfishly) have a lot of fun with the library, pushing its boundaries and re-evaluating its 'API' as I discovered/explored the world of generative art. Sadly my personal funds have run out and I've not been successful finding sponsors etc. But the work has helped me land a new/exciting full-time job so I've wasted nothing through my endeavour. I wish Will McGugan all the best at the start of his adventure, and hope he has as much fun as I've had over the next year or two! [1] - https://github.com/KaliedaRik/Scrawl-canvas https://github.com/KaliedaRik/Scrawl-canvas

intricatedetail 5y ago

The problem with open source is that is over represented by privileged people, who have resources to work on it instead of having to have paying job. If you are poor, you have limited chances to contribute anything and thus also potentially getting worse jobs due to no OSS contributions in CV.

Nbox9 5y ago
The benefit of open source is that anyone can contribute, thus someone that cannot afford a university degree or does not have the social network that comes with high status can still prove their skill as a software engineer and find a high paying job.
- intricatedetail 5y ago
  But how can they do that if they need to work for money? Exposure doesn't pay bills. Money is a barrier.
  - Nbox9 5y ago
    It’s just another door into the profession, one that is honestly more accessible than many others. We cannot remove all barriers to being a software engineer, because people have to learn the skills somewhere.

ww520 5y ago

Governments can encourage donation to OSS projects by structuring favorable tax code for donation like R&D credit.

stocknoob 5y ago

People are coming up with crazy workarounds for funding. Taxes, subscriptions, government programs, begging profit-driven corporations to donate… As programmers in a lucrative field, you can get financial independence (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/ https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-si...). Then you can work on whatever you want without hoping for the rest of the world to change so you can pursue your passions.

tambourine_man 5y ago

I had no idea you could drive 60fps animations in the terminal. How’s that even possible? I only had limited experience with curses ages ago. Is he just spewing control characters crazy fast and the terminal is keeping up fine? Anyway, this guy is a genius and I hope the funding goes well. His other projects look amazing as well. If I were a betting man, I’d wager the browser is the minimum common denominator, not the terminal. But I’d like to live in such a world.

AlexAndScripts 5y ago
Hardware accelerated terminals have been around for a while.
- tambourine_man 5y ago
  I thought it was scrolling that’s was hardware accelerated. How do you hardware accelerate control characters?

vermaden 5y ago

"I'm working on open source full time" - writing that from a Mac ... :D

causehealth101 5y ago

I have a dumb question, tangentially related to this: Can you set up a non-profit as long as fees and/or donations are limited to expenses (not compensation)?

egberts1 5y ago

Minimum Financial Compensation License. Thou shall contribute before using. ——— - Don’t have to say how much. - Only individuals may request anonymity - May post donor list (good for the shaming larger corporation or well-endowed benefactors/benefitees) - Profit!