9 ms·
> and in contributions to open source software It seems like you took the marketing on the tin for open-source seriously. Have you had "the pleasure" of maint
by ericb 2y ago
> and in contributions to open source software
It seems like you took the marketing on the tin for open-source seriously. Have you had "the pleasure" of maintaining an open-source project?
Contributions are rare. They are almost always self-interested. "Giving back" isn't a factor as you often are helping the rare contributor by main-lining their code so they don't have to maintain a fork.
> As I see it, if your startup's business model relies on your core code being proprietary, you don't have a business model.
Reality begs to differ. Google, Meta, Instagram, Uber, Microsoft... seem to have business models.
- OutOfHere 2y agoI even consider a new Issue a contribution. It helps me identify the most common issues so they can be addressed, making the software better. Issues are a function of adoption which is a function of open source. Google, Meta, and Microsoft are not startups. They are lobbying firms that are protected from above. Uber was once a startup. It is no longer a startup. Once you IPO, you are no longer a startup. In any event, Uber has always had a strong open source presence. Their core competency is available to everyone via cadence, h3, RIBs, etc.
- scotty79 2y agoIs any Google business apart from selling ads profitable yet?