271–280 of 360 posts
It's easy to dictate morals for others. How about let oss be voluntary and thank people for giving what they did in the past?
Build a free bridge across a river, which allows a town to grow on the other side, then shut down free access to the bridge. The builders are entitled to do this, but doesn't make it the right thing to do.
It seems to me that open source/ free software might be in its death throes. Can anyone name a recent open source library or program that is widely used and community controlled beside Linux? Open source now mainly serves as a way for trillion dollar companies to pool resources to develop software they all need and minimize how many developers they need to hire (see Linux). We have seen again and again how open sourc…
I had used akka several years before for a commercial project. It worked wonder for me. Personally I have no issue with their change of license. Author has authority, as simple as that. I'm willing to pay for something useful. People seem to take a moral high ground when it comes to software. If someone decide to make some useful project opensource. Full respect. If they changed their mind later to make the project p…
The "moral high ground" is a recognition of the true dynamic in open source. What really happens is: 1) Project is open source 2) People use the project because it is open source 3) People contribute bug reports and fixes, creating value and improving the open source project because it is open source 4) People spread the word about the project, free marketing because it is open source 5) Maintainers decide to relicen…
> Akka requires significant investment in order to maintain its position as a preeminent distributed systems runtime. Many organizations have adopted Akka and are seeing significant benefits for their organizations.
> However, in recent years an increasing number of those organizations have elected to self-support without either contributing back to the community or by investing in annual subscriptions. We have an ambitious roadmap for the future of Akka and require a way to fund and sustain that development.
> We believe that larger organizations that are seeing business benefits from Akka should contribute to the ongoing health and evolution of the project.
They need money to continue development, and the current model isn't generating enough revenue for them to stay in business.
Does DCO prevent this kind of thing from happening? I think moves like this demotivated and discourages a lot of potential contributors and spreads fear. That's not a good thing. Imagine a contributor who's first contribution to Open Source was this project. I am not sure he'd be very happy about a move such as this (or maybe he won't care).
I had used akka several years before for a commercial project. It worked wonder for me. Personally I have no issue with their change of license. Author has authority, as simple as that. I'm willing to pay for something useful. People seem to take a moral high ground when it comes to software. If someone decide to make some useful project opensource. Full respect. If they changed their mind later to make the project p…
The "moral high ground" is a recognition of the true dynamic in open source. What really happens is: 1) Project is open source 2) People use the project because it is open source 3) People contribute bug reports and fixes, creating value and improving the open source project because it is open source 4) People spread the word about the project, free marketing because it is open source 5) Maintainers decide to relicen…
I am grateful that open source projects exist. But their "turning around" doesn't make me less grateful.
It seems to me that open source/ free software might be in its death throes. Can anyone name a recent open source library or program that is widely used and community controlled beside Linux? Open source now mainly serves as a way for trillion dollar companies to pool resources to develop software they all need and minimize how many developers they need to hire (see Linux). We have seen again and again how open sourc…
I'd answer the opposite question. What do I use in my daily work that isn't open source? Sure there's binary blobs/drivers here and there, and whatever the cloud providers are keeping to themselves.
But c'mon, all the languages, the build tools, web frameworks, libraries, databases (sql and non-sql).
"FOSS is just not a good business model. But when making decisions about what libraries to use, or where to invest my time, such concerns are simply not my problem."
and:
"It’s morally wrong to make the product popular, by advertising it as Open Source / Free Software, and then doing a reversal later."
If their business model isn't your problem, then what you think about their license isn't their problem.
The "Tragedy of the Commons" is not the same thing as the "Free-Rider Problem" - in the former case, individual overuse is the issue, where in the latter (as in F/OSS) the problem is the failure to muster the necessary resources.
Tragedy of the Commons is essentially impossible for software, which can be copied and redistributed an unlimited number of times. If the supply is not limited, it can't be disproportionately abused by certain entities and the supply depleted.
Pre reading: Is it because VC funded company needs to show returns ? https://www.crunchbase.com/funding_round/typesafe-series-d--... post-reading: ...probably
All companies need to show returns, otherwise they run out of money and die. Not sure what VC funding has to do with this except, perhaps, making the "live open or die" model seem attractive at the start.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, as far as actor systems went, it's no Erlang. The same "DON'T BLOCK, IT'LL DO BAD THINGS BECAUSE IT BLOCKS THE THREAD" approach that you find in things like Vert.x. Letting my actor's function block was the best bit about Erlang.
Java is getting that through project Loom.