6 ms·

I came across this a few months ago when I was evaluating open source installer options for my own open source project. I have no issue with charging for binari

I came across this a few months ago when I was evaluating open source installer options for my own open source project. I have no issue with charging for binaries while the source is available under an OSI license, but this from the README rubbed me the wrong way: "To ensure the long-term sustainability of this project, use of the WiX Toolset requires an Open Source Maintenance Fee. While the source code is freely available under the terms of the LICENSE, all other aspects of the project--including opening or commenting on issues, participating in discussions and downloading releases--require adherence to the Maintenance Fee. In short, if you use this project to generate revenue, the Open Source Maintenance Fee is required." I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume this is just a difficult concept to succinctly explain in a short paragraph. But that summary - that revenue-generating use requires payment - feels misleading to me. Under their license, nothing stops me from creating my own build from source and using it per the terms of the MS-RL license, including for commercial purposes. So to me it feels like a scare tactic to coerce commercial users into becoming sponsors for the project. I certainly understand the challenges faced by open source maintainers today, but the specific approach taken here just doesn't feel ethical to me. I ended up passing on WiX for that reason even though I'm not a commercial user.

maxerickson 1y ago
Isn't it just a clear statement that they aren't going to give commercial users support for free? I know you are saying it isn't clear, but your quote literally includes the statement "While the source code is freely available under the terms of the LICENSE".
- opticfluorine 1y ago
  I personally think this last sentence from my quote makes it unclear: "In short, if you use this project to generate revenue, the Open Source Maintenance Fee is required." Perhaps I'm being too semantic, but I don't feel that is an accurate representation of the license terms involved here.
  - Applejinx 1y ago
    It could add 'and expect active support FROM US' and be more accurate. I guess it's treating 'if you are generating revenue and need support you're gonna be demanding as hell' as implicit?
TrueDuality 1y ago
Start-ups and smaller companies that are extremely cash strapped are willing to take an opensource project, compile it themselves, turn it into deployment artifacts and manage that whole lifecycle. There is a threshold where paying someone to manage and certify the lifecycle of tools is more valuable than keeping it in house. This is pushing those enterprise customers that are just using and updating binary releases because they don't want to take on the compliance risks of first-party support to pay for official versions.
- 9cb14c1ec0 1y ago
  Yes, just a couple of minutes setting up a Github action on a fork, and you're good to go.
  - robmensching 1y ago
    Yep, and now you have about half a million lines of code* to maintain as well. Have fun with it!* * Last count the WiX Toolset had 589,719 loc but 444,936 if you skip comments and whitespace. * This is the point, maintaining successful (and often non-trivial) projects requires a good bit of work.
    - 9cb14c1ec0 1y ago
      You can always just merge in the latest changes from the upstream project with a click or too. No need to maintain it on your own.
- hiAndrewQuinn 1y ago
  I agree with your point. In the name of promoting basic numeracy: """ Sign up for GitHub Sponsorship and create the tiers: Small organization (< 20 people): $10/mo Medium organization (20-100 people): $40/mo Large organization (> 100 people): $60/mo """ You are beyond 'cash strapped' if $10/month for something as fundamental as this breaks the bank. The fully loaded cost of a single US software developer is already above $100/hour.
ysofunny 1y ago
I think they're trying to say that if you are talking to them on behalf or a revenue generating entity, then you better pay them to talk to them about the project. feels like a pay to interect iff one of the parties interacting is a profit making entity
robmensching 1y ago
> I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume this is just a difficult concept to succinctly explain in a short paragraph. It is challenging to describe the concept succinctly, especially as there are lots of varied expectations people have about how Open Source projects work. I'm definitely open to suggestions on how to improve the text.
csomar 1y ago
If you read the comments on the GitHub issue, the guys seems more than reasonable. My understanding is that they want you pay if you are making money. My guess if you are just a one-person show with a just-started product, they probably won't care much. Here is their sponsorship page: https://github.com/sponsors/wixtoolset https://github.com/sponsors/wixtoolset
- robmensching 1y ago
  Yeah, that's basically it.

maxerickson 1y ago

Isn't it just a clear statement that they aren't going to give commercial users support for free? I know you are saying it isn't clear, but your quote literally includes the statement "While the source code is freely available under the terms of the LICENSE".

opticfluorine 1y ago
I personally think this last sentence from my quote makes it unclear: "In short, if you use this project to generate revenue, the Open Source Maintenance Fee is required." Perhaps I'm being too semantic, but I don't feel that is an accurate representation of the license terms involved here.
- Applejinx 1y ago
  It could add 'and expect active support FROM US' and be more accurate. I guess it's treating 'if you are generating revenue and need support you're gonna be demanding as hell' as implicit?

TrueDuality 1y ago

Start-ups and smaller companies that are extremely cash strapped are willing to take an opensource project, compile it themselves, turn it into deployment artifacts and manage that whole lifecycle. There is a threshold where paying someone to manage and certify the lifecycle of tools is more valuable than keeping it in house. This is pushing those enterprise customers that are just using and updating binary releases because they don't want to take on the compliance risks of first-party support to pay for official versions.

9cb14c1ec0 1y ago
Yes, just a couple of minutes setting up a Github action on a fork, and you're good to go.
- robmensching 1y ago
  Yep, and now you have about half a million lines of code* to maintain as well. Have fun with it!* * Last count the WiX Toolset had 589,719 loc but 444,936 if you skip comments and whitespace. * This is the point, maintaining successful (and often non-trivial) projects requires a good bit of work.
  - 9cb14c1ec0 1y ago
    You can always just merge in the latest changes from the upstream project with a click or too. No need to maintain it on your own.
hiAndrewQuinn 1y ago
I agree with your point. In the name of promoting basic numeracy: """ Sign up for GitHub Sponsorship and create the tiers: Small organization (< 20 people): $10/mo Medium organization (20-100 people): $40/mo Large organization (> 100 people): $60/mo """ You are beyond 'cash strapped' if $10/month for something as fundamental as this breaks the bank. The fully loaded cost of a single US software developer is already above $100/hour.

ysofunny 1y ago

I think they're trying to say that if you are talking to them on behalf or a revenue generating entity, then you better pay them to talk to them about the project. feels like a pay to interect iff one of the parties interacting is a profit making entity

robmensching 1y ago

> I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume this is just a difficult concept to succinctly explain in a short paragraph. It is challenging to describe the concept succinctly, especially as there are lots of varied expectations people have about how Open Source projects work. I'm definitely open to suggestions on how to improve the text.

csomar 1y ago

If you read the comments on the GitHub issue, the guys seems more than reasonable. My understanding is that they want you pay if you are making money. My guess if you are just a one-person show with a just-started product, they probably won't care much. Here is their sponsorship page: https://github.com/sponsors/wixtoolset https://github.com/sponsors/wixtoolset

robmensching 1y ago
Yeah, that's basically it.