Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

blog.gitea.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 187 posts

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#81

Post by goodpoint »

Aachen wrote: post #78
goodpoint wrote: post #76

> there are a few corporations (with revenues that are greater than some countries GDP) are building on Gitea for core products without even contributing back enhancements That's exactly what you get when you release Gitea under MIT. What they are looking for is AGPL.

Yeah I was fully expecting a licence change with that preamble. And then they mention DAO ._. GPL scares people for stupid reasons (stupid from my fanatical perspective that if you use open source software, of course your derivatives ought to be open as well), Gitea honestly might be so popular because it had a more free license than GPL. Doesn't mean I'm sad to see they're not even trying to make these changes be co…

> Gitea honestly might be so popular because it had a more free license than GPL

Citation needed.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#82

Post by Aachen »

johannes1234321 wrote: post #55
Semaphor wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, in Germany, that is an extremely convenient way of paying.

Not only convenient, but also cheap. Often free, certainly less fees than PayPal etc.

Don't non-consumer account holders pay much higher fees? I seem to remember they were okay if you can have a very low transaction cap, but if you need to accept/send many payments, you had to get expensive subscriptions or pay per transaction.

Almost certainly still cheaper than literally any alternative, though, since you need that bank account anyway and I will get very much doubt they'd take as big a cut as the paypal mafia.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#83

Post by tucnak »

remram wrote: post #5

I've been donating to Gitea for years (on their Open Collective [1]) but if they start with this cryptocurrency/blockchain stuff, I am out. I am trying to fund development, not invest unstable currency technology. Gitea itself started as a fork of Gogs, it wouldn't be too surprising to see it fork again if they start being creative with the brand. [1]: https://opencollective.com/gitea

[flagged]

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#84

Post by alpaca128 »

Shared404 wrote: post #17

I am happy that my git host of choice has a very simple monetization/sustainability model: I pay money, they host my code. Thanks ddevault and anyone else from Sourcehut who may see this!

I just wish they offered more than one payment option. I don't have a credit card.

Other than that it's great, uncomplicated and doesn't try to be some special CI cloud toolchain as a service and won't spam me with notifications.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#85

Post by Aachen »

sofixa wrote: post #10
eitland wrote: post #4

Good luck with it. And if you: - work for a company that uses open source, look for excuses to support it (support contract, etc. I even got good value out of some.) - are an open source project that takes donations: don't get greedy. Two projects I went out of my way to support because they were open source shortly afterwards started "experimenting with models".

> are an open source project that takes donations: don't get greedy. Two projects I went out of my way to support because they were open source shortly afterwards started "experimenting with models". How do you know it's greed and not just insufficient donations forcing them to try to find alternative financing? Just because you donated doesn't mean enough people/businesses did.

> insufficient donations forcing them to ...

See, that's the beauty of open source: nobody is ever obliged to do anything they don't feel like doing. If nobody wants to pay, the maintainer can just walk away. If that bothers a user, they can feel free to contribute patches and pay the maintainer's time to review and include them. (Or become a maintainer themselves using a different trademark.)

Of course, the flip side of that coin is that the maintainers are also free to try to turn their repository access into a money making machine. I don't have any issue with it, since I can just fork the code if I don't like it. It's just not the result of getting too little money and being "forced" into anything.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#86

Post by Aachen »

pjmlp wrote: post #19
sofixa wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are an open source project that takes donations: don't get greedy. Two projects I went out of my way to support because they were open source shortly afterwards started "experimenting with models". How do you know it's greed and not just insufficient donations forcing them to try to find alternative financing? Just because you donated doesn't mean enough people/businesses did.

This is usually the main problem, in most cases the donations aren't enough as main line of income.

Not enough for what? Paying expenses? Or are you expecting that open source contributions are to be paid at developer rates, and that one should contribute only as much time as is adequately paid?

I thought open source meant that everyone was volunteering by default, just writing the features they'd enjoy to have for themselves, and that sponsorship of development time is not the norm aside from hugely important projects (like bigcorps sponsoring kernel development, but also making billions by launching Android that makes extensive use of this kernel) or projects where the sponsor has a commercial interest. Donations are typically for raising money for things like hosting the website and download bandwidth fees.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#87

Post by 2pEXgD0fZ5cF »

slbtty wrote: post #7
remram wrote: post #5

I've been donating to Gitea for years (on their Open Collective [1]) but if they start with this cryptocurrency/blockchain stuff, I am out. I am trying to fund development, not invest unstable currency technology. Gitea itself started as a fork of Gogs, it wouldn't be too surprising to see it fork again if they start being creative with the brand. [1]: https://opencollective.com/gitea

They don't even mention a single thing about crypto?

> we are experimenting with creating a decentralized autonomous organization where contributors would receive benefits based on their participation

Also in their footer:

> Sponsored by INBlockchain, Equinix Metal, Two Sigma, SoEBeS, Allspice, Towhee, Hostea, Jeff Moe, and all of our backers on Open Collective.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#88

Post by akho »

sofixa wrote: post #10
eitland wrote: post #4

Good luck with it. And if you: - work for a company that uses open source, look for excuses to support it (support contract, etc. I even got good value out of some.) - are an open source project that takes donations: don't get greedy. Two projects I went out of my way to support because they were open source shortly afterwards started "experimenting with models".

> are an open source project that takes donations: don't get greedy. Two projects I went out of my way to support because they were open source shortly afterwards started "experimenting with models". How do you know it's greed and not just insufficient donations forcing them to try to find alternative financing? Just because you donated doesn't mean enough people/businesses did.

What’s “insufficient donations”? Insufficient for what?

What this is saying is that:

1) There are some large companies that are using Gitea as a core product, and not contributing their enhancements back to the community.

2) We are starting a company that will have Gitea as a core product, and will not contribute our enhancements (“enhanced enterprise version”) back to the community.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#89

Post by kdumont »

dachary wrote: post #66
guywhocodes wrote: post #11

Lost me at: > An enhanced enterprise version Good thing it's towards the end, guess it's time for the next fork of gogs then.

It means there will be a proprietary version of Gitea, named Gitea Enterprise or something similar. The company is based on an Open Core business model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-core_model .

This is not the case. No one has said Gitea is going to an Open Core model.

Re: Open source sustainment and the future of Gitea

#90

Post by Aachen »

goodpoint wrote: post #81
Aachen wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I was fully expecting a licence change with that preamble. And then they mention DAO ._. GPL scares people for stupid reasons (stupid from my fanatical perspective that if you use open source software, of course your derivatives ought to be open as well), Gitea honestly might be so popular because it had a more free license than GPL. Doesn't mean I'm sad to see they're not even trying to make these changes be co…

> Gitea honestly might be so popular because it had a more free license than GPL Citation needed.

Citation for a hunch is pretty hard to give
Post reply on HN