3 ms·
I see lots of sentiment in this thread that amounts to "I didn't know you were going to get rich off of my work." That's anathema to Open Source. How do I know
by wyldfire 5y ago
I see lots of sentiment in this thread that amounts to "I didn't know you were going to get rich off of my work."
That's anathema to Open Source. How do I know? Check "The Open Source Way" [1].
If you feel uncompensated, use a license that prevents commercial use.
[1] https://opensource.com/open-source-way https://opensource.com/open-source-way
- esarbe 5y agoI get the feeling that you misunderstand the gist of the article. The gist of the article is not "I didn't know you were going to get rich off of my work (and I'm pissed off by that)". The premise is - in my reading - "Don't point the finger at me for writing bad software in my own free time, when you didn't even consider contributing to it and don't try to shift the blame when you have to face the consequences of your own cheap behavior". At least that's my interpretation.
- blibble 5y agomy interpretation was a little different I see the author annoyed that companies don't want to to be their patron to just pay them to work on random things that they have fun working on and attempting to leverage this issue to try to draw attention to this "injustice" as someone with a full time software job: I wish I could only work on things that interest me... rather than spending 80% of my time working on boring things and dealing with customers who set deadlines and expect to receive a specific product that they're paying for
- rboes 5y agoI got the first interpretation, but I think yours is what we should be talking about. The responsibility for this bug is not on the maintainer, more so on the company for accepting it into their codebase without any vetting.