I consider freedom a paramount attribute I expect from software I use. However, I tend to use use proprietary software if its much more convenient than free opt

I consider freedom a paramount attribute I expect from software I use. However, I tend to use use proprietary software if its much more convenient than free options and either 1) I can easily switch to an alternative (preferably open), 2) It is being developed in an ethical way 3) It's a game. I consider proprietary software to be developed in an "ethical" way when an entity makes an official statement regarding the destiny of the product itself should said entity disappear, go bankrupt or, in general, discontinue development. For example: Trolltech (then acquired by Nokia), developers of the Qt framework, double-license their product under a free copyleft license (GPL/LGPL) and a "Commercial [proprietary] Developer License". In order to protect both the community and their customers they made an agreement with the "KDE Free Qt Foundation"¹ which says: "Should Nokia discontinue the development of the Qt Free Edition under these licenses, then the Foundation has the right to release Qt under a BSD-style license or under other open source licenses. The agreement stays valid in case of a buy-out, a merger or bankruptcy." That's why I would like to hear from Jon what his plans are in case he decides (or he is forced) to discontinue development of SublimeText for any reason. There are egregious examples of successful editors being developed, sold and then (mostly) discontinued. Enough broken promises to warrant strong assurances from Jon. __________ ¹ http://www.kde.org/community/whatiskde/kdefreeqtfoundation.php http://www.kde.org/community/whatiskde/kdefreeqtfoundation.p...