Live data from Hacker News

Give away your code, but never your time

wgross.net

61–70 of 228 posts

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#61

Glad to see other ideas and operating models being proposed and tried. Most of us live in countries where you need money to pay rent and buy food. Unless you're already wealthy, that means you need to work (trade time for money) or find a way to trade time for an ownership stake that will, you hope, generate income (and in the process that stake becomes itself more valuable). A buddy of mine in a maintainer for a pop…

Reviewing and either accepting or rejecting (in full, no need to cherry-pick) large PR's is entirely up to the author. You were right; the safest way is to simply ask if they're willing to sponsor that custom work, and how would they like to be credited for their sponsorship. There's no need to go crazy about it. If it's not a right fit for the project or too much effort for the maintainer, then they can pay or it wi…

Yes. That sounds reasonable.

The problem comes that, as with many things, people like to live others' values for them. People become unreasonable. My friend was worried that he'd lose the respect, unreasonably in my view, of the community for not doing the "right thing", which in his view was dealing with a feature and set of PRs that were not on the roadmap to happen just now. And that word "sell out" - his word - for asking to be paid for his time was the root fear.

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#62

> 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…

This year's LinuxCon has been rebranded under the umbrella "Open Source Summit".

Maybe it's time to fork the term "open source", as was done to "free software".

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#63

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).

Cause vs effect. Money is the latter ;)

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#64

Devil's advocate: How about an issue/PR tracker that lets users pay for priority? A simple bidding system. If BigCorp International is willing to pay $200/hour for IE10 support, they can be next on your list. And afterward, an bug with significant community support totalling $50/hour, pledged by 50 different users. With allowances for your own preferences as maintainer and the needs of the community, of course, but g…

Something like this could work, but I worry that it would create competitiveness and animosity among users.

This is the point of having a seperate buisness license. Sell to big companies along with support.

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#65

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 mo…

Are you sure? If what you're saying is true, wouldn't that mean it would be impossible for any business to have a "sense of community" around it?

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#66

Glad to see other ideas and operating models being proposed and tried. Most of us live in countries where you need money to pay rent and buy food. Unless you're already wealthy, that means you need to work (trade time for money) or find a way to trade time for an ownership stake that will, you hope, generate income (and in the process that stake becomes itself more valuable). A buddy of mine in a maintainer for a pop…

It sounds like big companies are using "sell out" as a weapon to get free work. I don't think someone drawing a large salary at a large company asking for free work is allowed to call anyone a sellout.

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#67

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…

This is true for some. Though I'm not sure it always applies. OpenSSL developers needed money to guarantee their time, yet for years it was not much money.

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reviewing and either accepting or rejecting (in full, no need to cherry-pick) large PR's is entirely up to the author. You were right; the safest way is to simply ask if they're willing to sponsor that custom work, and how would they like to be credited for their sponsorship. There's no need to go crazy about it. If it's not a right fit for the project or too much effort for the maintainer, then they can pay or it wi…

Yes. That sounds reasonable. The problem comes that, as with many things, people like to live others' values for them. People become unreasonable. My friend was worried that he'd lose the respect, unreasonably in my view, of the community for not doing the "right thing", which in his view was dealing with a feature and set of PRs that were not on the roadmap to happen just now. And that word "sell out" - his word - f…

Understood completely and agreed.. but (almost) everyone has to 'sell out' by taking a job. A bit of reticence in this area is noble but perhaps misplaced, and people who get at least somewhat comfortable in asking for other people's money (aka selling out) might tend to not have as many concerns about money or pull requests. ;)

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#69

>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…

> This sounds like a great way to lose all your real contributors. The article mentions "get paid for your time" over and over again, yet who is paying me for the time to write the code for the PR? You expect me to both dedicate my time to writing the code for a PR, and then pay you for the privilege.

It certainly sounds absurd on the face of it.

On the other hand, I can think of at least three cases where I'd do the work of submitting a PR if the project in question required me to pay.

In each case I can't currently gauge accurately enough whether these projects have a well-functioning development process. I could easily end up with a bitrotting PR with the project lead making a not unreasonable argument about why it's rotting (their time is limited, something else is taking priority, etc.). I imagine I'm not the only person who's ever been in such a "holding pattern."

On the other hand, if a reputable project says they'll take money in order to merge a branch I want, things become less amorphous very quickly. A project lead is not going to get away with blowing off a bitrotting merge request, at least not without their project's reputation (and future income from PR's) taking a hit.

edit: clarification

Re: Give away your code, but never your time

#70

Glad to see other ideas and operating models being proposed and tried. Most of us live in countries where you need money to pay rent and buy food. Unless you're already wealthy, that means you need to work (trade time for money) or find a way to trade time for an ownership stake that will, you hope, generate income (and in the process that stake becomes itself more valuable). A buddy of mine in a maintainer for a pop…

"One day he got an email from someone - likely someone making $150-$200k- more or less demanding that he review and accept some PRs, as well as do some work himself, for a feature they needed."

This is called a 'business opportunity'.

Seriously, people are going to ask you for free stuff all the time.

Sometimes they'll be up front about it (as in, "we don't have budget for that, but can you still help us out?"), and sometimes they just won't specify initially if they are willing to pay or not (ie, they'll just make a demand).

Every interaction is a negotiation, even if you are led to believe otherwise.

Post reply on HN