4 ms·

> After all the work I've put into this thing I'm selfish. I want to benefit from what I created... You are evidently aware of free/open source software, so I'

by rwl 12y ago

> After all the work I've put into this thing I'm selfish. I want to benefit from what I created... You are evidently aware of free/open source software, so I'm curious: if you thought that other people would be interested enough in this software that they might pay for it, why did you put in all the effort up front to develop it yourself? Why didn't you instead make the project open source much earlier, so that you wouldn't have to pay all the costs of developing it yourself? I'm not being sarcastic or rhetorical; I'm asking because I can't imagine starting a large software project like this and not wanting to get the benefits of open source development. If you are considering open source now, why did you decide not to do it earlier? > what's in it for ME if I open source? At this point, there may or may not be much you can get from this project in the way of monetary reward by open sourcing it. That depends on who would use this software, whether they'd pay you to support it or customize it, etc. But apart from money, you'd likely get: other people reviewing, testing, debugging and maintaining your code; other people packaging your code for distribution on various platforms; other people helping to support users of your software on mailing lists and in forums; other people writing documentation; the satisfaction of providing something useful to others; and praise and thanks from users of FOSS. None of those benefits come in the form of money, but they are nevertheless non-trivial.

jimmaswell 12y ago
>if you thought that other people would be interested enough in this software that they might pay for it, why did you put in all the effort up front to develop it yourself? Why didn't you instead make the project open source much earlier, so that you wouldn't have to pay all the costs of developing it yourself? "If you knew people might pay you money for it, why didn't you make it so they didn't have to, instead of making them pay money for it?" What?
- rwl 12y ago
  My point was this: presumably, Spearchucker wanted this software because it was useful to him, not just because it might be useful to someone else. Getting it had a cost: the time and effort to develop it. He could either take on that whole cost himself up front, and try to recover it from other users when the program was finished, or he could share the cost with other users starting from an earlier stage by starting an open source project. If you're primarily concerned with having the program completed, why take the first path? The second path seems like it will bring you to that goal more quickly and for less time, effort, and risk. It just makes more sense. And even if you're primarily concerned with making money, the second path can still make more sense. Using funding mechanisms like Kickstarter, you can be paid to write software that you release under an open source license -- and since your backers commit to payment up front, before you write the code, you don't have to take on the risk that no one buys a license for the completed program. So again, why go the other route?
Spearchucker 12y ago
...why did you put in all the effort up front to develop it yourself? Because I've spent most of my life working with people who are convinced they're good, when they're not. If they were, they'd have worked, or be working for the likes of Apple, Google, Facebook or Microsoft. I'm so very, very tired of charismatic but incompetent hackers. That is the second reason for creating the software. The first was because I needed a database that works offline and syncs across all my devices. The other problem with open source dev is dealing with the impossible egos. I want to write good code. I don't give a damn what anyone thinks of my language choice, code style or lack of dress sense.
- rwl 12y ago
  > The other problem with open source dev is dealing with the impossible egos. I want to write good code. I don't give a damn what anyone thinks of my language choice, code style or lack of dress sense. It's funny -- in my (perhaps limited) experience, most of the 'impossible egos' I've seen in the FOSS community belong to people who have similar concerns. They have put a lot of effort into developing a project in a certain way, and are frustrated and annoyed when a Johnny-come-lately coder appears and demands they do something differently. The attitude comes from needing to protect a successful project from 'contributions' that, if unchecked, could ruin the code or the community. It's true that running a successful FOSS project requires managing both your code and your community. You will never be able to just write good code if you want your project to thrive. Maybe you're not into that; that's fine. But, as you well know, that means you have to take on all of the tasks that a healthy FOSS community could otherwise help you out with, like testing, debugging, and writing documentation. If you're eventually hoping to be compensated for doing all that work yourself by selling copies of your software, you're still going to have to do more than just write good code. You're going to have to market it. Personally, I'd rather help manage a healthy development community than try my hand at marketing. Again, maybe you feel differently, but the point is that there's more to do than just write the code, unless you only care about using it yourself. A FOSS community can help you with that; so to answer your original question, that's the benefit.

by rwl 12y ago

jimmaswell 12y ago

>if you thought that other people would be interested enough in this software that they might pay for it, why did you put in all the effort up front to develop it yourself? Why didn't you instead make the project open source much earlier, so that you wouldn't have to pay all the costs of developing it yourself? "If you knew people might pay you money for it, why didn't you make it so they didn't have to, instead of making them pay money for it?" What?

rwl 12y ago
My point was this: presumably, Spearchucker wanted this software because it was useful to him, not just because it might be useful to someone else. Getting it had a cost: the time and effort to develop it. He could either take on that whole cost himself up front, and try to recover it from other users when the program was finished, or he could share the cost with other users starting from an earlier stage by starting an open source project. If you're primarily concerned with having the program completed, why take the first path? The second path seems like it will bring you to that goal more quickly and for less time, effort, and risk. It just makes more sense. And even if you're primarily concerned with making money, the second path can still make more sense. Using funding mechanisms like Kickstarter, you can be paid to write software that you release under an open source license -- and since your backers commit to payment up front, before you write the code, you don't have to take on the risk that no one buys a license for the completed program. So again, why go the other route?

Spearchucker 12y ago

...why did you put in all the effort up front to develop it yourself? Because I've spent most of my life working with people who are convinced they're good, when they're not. If they were, they'd have worked, or be working for the likes of Apple, Google, Facebook or Microsoft. I'm so very, very tired of charismatic but incompetent hackers. That is the second reason for creating the software. The first was because I needed a database that works offline and syncs across all my devices. The other problem with open source dev is dealing with the impossible egos. I want to write good code. I don't give a damn what anyone thinks of my language choice, code style or lack of dress sense.

rwl 12y ago
> The other problem with open source dev is dealing with the impossible egos. I want to write good code. I don't give a damn what anyone thinks of my language choice, code style or lack of dress sense. It's funny -- in my (perhaps limited) experience, most of the 'impossible egos' I've seen in the FOSS community belong to people who have similar concerns. They have put a lot of effort into developing a project in a certain way, and are frustrated and annoyed when a Johnny-come-lately coder appears and demands they do something differently. The attitude comes from needing to protect a successful project from 'contributions' that, if unchecked, could ruin the code or the community. It's true that running a successful FOSS project requires managing both your code and your community. You will never be able to just write good code if you want your project to thrive. Maybe you're not into that; that's fine. But, as you well know, that means you have to take on all of the tasks that a healthy FOSS community could otherwise help you out with, like testing, debugging, and writing documentation. If you're eventually hoping to be compensated for doing all that work yourself by selling copies of your software, you're still going to have to do more than just write good code. You're going to have to market it. Personally, I'd rather help manage a healthy development community than try my hand at marketing. Again, maybe you feel differently, but the point is that there's more to do than just write the code, unless you only care about using it yourself. A FOSS community can help you with that; so to answer your original question, that's the benefit.