Changing the Ungit license from MIT to Faircode
1–10 of 117 posts
Re: Changing the Ungit license from MIT to Faircode
#2Will be interesting to see the resulting fork that keeps the MIT license. Looks like a few have already sprung up.
Re: Changing the Ungit license from MIT to Faircode
#3For open-source projects driven mainly by one contributor, I think the model employed by Sidekiq[1] is better than this one.
There is a base version with the MIT (or similar) license. Then there is a PRO version which adds some enterprise functionality + premium support.
But still a good thing that Ungit is trying this. There is value in experimentation!
Re: Changing the Ungit license from MIT to Faircode
#4Bad timing, seems licenseyourcode.com is down and does not currently work.
Re: Changing the Ungit license from MIT to Faircode
#5I don't have anything to add, but just want to say it's refreshing to see such a civil discussion surrounding a license change like this.
Re: Changing the Ungit license from MIT to Faircode
#6It is interesting and important to think about ways to support open source project contributors, especially when the projects are being used in commercial organizations. It would have been better to see this license change idea through an RFC before a change though, and with an attorney’s advice. If he does really want this to be an experiment it would have been good for him to have a better background on the types of license models available and an attorney’s help with license language changes and implications.
Re: Changing the Ungit license from MIT to Faircode
#7For open-source projects driven mainly by one contributor, I think the model employed by Sidekiq[1] is better than this one. There is a base version with the MIT (or similar) license. Then there is a PRO version which adds some enterprise functionality + premium support. But still a good thing that Ungit is trying this. There is value in experimentation! [1] https://github.com/mperham/sidekiq
I've always wondered, in such cases where you have an open core and plan to monetize on extra features and plugins; what do you do if the community just goes ahead and adds those extra features? Or someone forks the project and adds the features?
Re: Changing the Ungit license from MIT to Faircode
#8Bad timing, seems licenseyourcode.com is down and does not currently work.
It was renamed to faircode.io
Re: Changing the Ungit license from MIT to Faircode
#9For open-source projects driven mainly by one contributor, I think the model employed by Sidekiq[1] is better than this one. There is a base version with the MIT (or similar) license. Then there is a PRO version which adds some enterprise functionality + premium support. But still a good thing that Ungit is trying this. There is value in experimentation! [1] https://github.com/mperham/sidekiq
I've always wondered, in such cases where you have an open core and plan to monetize on extra features and plugins; what do you do if the community just goes ahead and adds those extra features? Or someone forks the project and adds the features?
There are several Sidekiq features others have added but I never trust them. If I am an enterprise I value reliability over price. I would pay a premium for something the Sidekiq owner worked on rather than a random contributor
Re: Changing the Ungit license from MIT to Faircode
#10Has the LYC license been tested in court ? I know GPL has.
I agree with the maintainer that they should be compensated for their time. An open core model works but depending on a project who has the time to set that up? Patreon or Kickstarter has the same issue.