Live data from Hacker News

Give away your code, but never your time

wgross.net

51–60 of 228 posts

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#51

> When I say “open source”, I mean code licensed in a way that it can be used to build proprietary things. This redefinition of a basic term should have been at the beginning, not the end.

And so should "open-source code is utility software".

Stallman was right when he said that the Open Source movement would eventually abandon any conceptions of software freedom - it seems to me that we now have a whole generation of "open source" contributors for whom the only type of freedom that matters is the freedom of downstream developers, rather than users, and who seem to think that the role of open source in the world is just to provide a base on top of which one can write proprietary applications. Where do developers of open source end-user applications fit into this picture?

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#52
post #26
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nor have I. As a manager/co-owner I can't think of a reasonable business-friendly way to allow my developers to spend work time on OSS. I would love to, of course, but our systems really do not facilitate community involvement.

> I would love to, of course If you did, you'd have found a way for it to work. Making a pretty cool deploy script? Document it and put it out there as OSS. Making a class/module to sort items semantically? Make it OSS. Someone made an IDE extension to syntax highlight WebVTT files? Make i OSS. Made a file lister/selector for JQuery? OSS. Integrating 3rd party X with 3rd party Y? Opensource your module for it. Unless…

It's one thing to write the code, but another thing to publish as open source. There's overhead: coordinating the PR in an existing project, responding to issues, writing a decent README, looking at PRs, etc in your own.

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#53
I think what open source needs is some very deliberate price discrimination. Have the license be free to the vast majority of users, and cost money for large corporations that can damn well afford it. Not, like, large amounts of money, just something vaguely close to the all-in cost of one full time developer.

Basically, "BSD, unless you're a $1B+ valued company that is not paying our software foundation $10k/mo".

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#54

I always wonder where coders find the time to significantly contribute to Opensouce projects - which many seem to do - after their day job, having played and eaten with their kids, and were an attentful husband.

I have a solid 1 hour train trip to and from work. Because of where I live I get a single train and always have a seat. Thats where I get the majority of it done.

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#55

>If you’re the leader of one of these projects, charge an annual fee for community membership. Open source, closed community. The message to users should be “do whatever you want with the code, but pay us for our time if you want to influence the project’s future.” Lock non-paying users out of the forum and issue tracker, and ignore their emails. People who don’t pay should feel like they are missing out on the party…

> You expect me to both dedicate my time to writing the code for a PR, and then pay you for the privilege.

No, better yet it would eliminate PRs from entitled users who think this way — who believe they contribute value by writing up issues and submitting minor pull requests that address their own needs, while remaining blind to the far greater value they receive from the project’s much larger code base; the mammoth time investment of the people who have designed, developed, and maintained that code base; and the thankless job those leaders have done nurturing a community often comprised of far more takers than givers.

Basically, the proposal eliminates the takers. Whether it would work or not is an open question. But if you find yourself feeling indignant at the very suggestion, then maybe take a hard look at which role you really fall in?

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#56

The author seems to believe contributions of code or contributions of bug reports are a net negative for the project, while the only thing that the project needs to survive is money to pay for the author's time. That is exactly backwards. Nearly all open source projects actually do not need any money at all to grow and prosper. They simply need contributions.. of time. In the form of bug reports and code. Take care o…

They do not need it, but it'd help quite a lot. If I got a bunch of money for doing open souce I could:

- Not find random jobs to be able to live, so more time for open source.

- Have more energy for open source (so important it has to be a separated point from the previous).

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#57

I always wonder where coders find the time to significantly contribute to Opensouce projects - which many seem to do - after their day job, having played and eaten with their kids, and were an attentful husband.

I did a lot during University years (while in a different major). I learned, I taught people, it was really fun. Now I only have the time/energy for 2-3 simultaneous side projects, with only 1 being open source at the moment. There's no way I could be doing the same was I married and with kids.

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#58
The notion of charging people to be part of the community seems like a terrific way to immediately kill any semblance of community.

Realistically, the only people who will pay a membership fee are those who can charge it to a company. That means you'll lose all the people hacking on the project in their free time.

Personally, I contributed a lot more to open source when I was in college and had more free time than money. There's no way I would have paid to be able to contribute.

The solution is really just to have lower expectations on maintainers, both around timely responses/support (want fast support, pay for it) and improvements. They can and should also be more liberal with adding maintainers.

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#59

I've never really worked at a place where we had any spare time for open source project development, nor time to opine on the social issues of the day. Must be nice, but I feel like a very small, privileged few actually live in that world. The rest of us have work to do.

This smells like a small-minded startup-bubble nonsense to me. If you have time to use open source software, you should make time to also submit fixes and open some of your work. That’s not to say startups don’t contribute, but my experience is that a lot of startups—usually led by inexperienced managers—see contribution as giving something for free instead of charging. Small-minded nonsense indeed.

> This smells like a small-minded startup-bubble nonsense to me

Small-minded, no doubt (though "business"-minded rather than specifically startup).

In my national context (Australia), the vast majority of companies, small and large, operate purely in the fundamentalist capitalist mindset. There is no 'should' (conceived ethically) in their stock of concepts. It literally doesn't exist (where it occurs it's just a PR exercise, which the PR department will translate into management's native dog-eat-dog language for their comprehension in meetings).

Ideally we wouldn't work for such companies. But the stock of jobs at better places is limited, so by statistical definition 'most' of us won't be there.

Post reply on HN