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

Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 162 posts

Re: Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

#131

Post by voakbasda »

DonHopkins wrote: post #114
cbm-vic-20 wrote: post #53

"Like with typical Machine-Learning and AI projects, the job of the data-engineer is the least fun part and everyone wants to be a data-scientist, that works with a magically curated data-lake. This is the same with industrial data-integration. Most focus goes onto the projects that allow you to do great things with industrial data, however almost nobody is willing to work on the part of actually getting the data." T…

Just like how everybody wants to be a game designer, so they can dictate to the engineers and artists how to implement all their glorious intricate designs they dreamed up while lounging in their leather armchair, without getting their own hands dirty doing any dull repetitive shit work in Unity3D or Photoshop, then complain bitterly when their minions didn't implement their vision properly to their exacting standard…

Knowing how to design a system is important even if you never get the chance to use that directly. Indirectly, it is useful when you need to call out a manager or colleague on their own bad designs.

Re: Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

#132

Post by bmn__ »

jamesrr39 wrote: post #124
chrisdutz wrote: post #108

Hi all, geee ... a friend pointed me here and I have to admit that I'm quite overwhelmed by the wave my post generated. But very happy it seeded some good discussions. However I should point out that only I said that I would stop providing free community support. I am only one of the contributors. Even if I am probalby one of the most active ones, there are still others probably going to step up and tackle the one or…

Just curious (not in the industry), and I guess you maybe have already looked into this, but in addition to paid support have you considered paid work for implementing a specific new feature that a company wanted? A previous company I worked for did this for custom requests and made some money out of it.

No one wants to pay for that either.

https://c-ware.de/en/cf-listing-page/

Re: Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

#133

Post by qwertox »

MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #44
qwertox wrote: post #29

Just quoting this snippet from the landing page: "No license costs, no restrictive licenses. Being open source, PLC4X is free of charge. Start experimenting without worrying about license costs or shady license agreements. The Apache 2.0 is one of the worlds most trusted and adopted open source licenses out there." Big companies need to grow up and start contributing with serious amounts. I wonder how this could get…

Taxes. You invented taxes.

At least in Germany taxes aren't bound to a specific purpose, they're not allowed to be. They get thrown into a big pot and then distributed as needed. Then you'd have these OSS developers (whoever represents them) fighting against other recipients.

It would be better to have the FAANGs of the world being forced to pay into a bucket which gets distributed specifically to OSS projects.

Re: Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

#134

Post by aspenmayer »

bmn__ wrote: post #132
jamesrr39 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just curious (not in the industry), and I guess you maybe have already looked into this, but in addition to paid support have you considered paid work for implementing a specific new feature that a company wanted? A previous company I worked for did this for custom requests and made some money out of it.

No one wants to pay for that either. https://c-ware.de/en/cf-listing-page/

What is up with those fundraising goals? Due to weird scaling, the number of 0s in the goal overflow onto each other, but it looks like you’re asking for hundreds of thousands or millions of euros to port things. Maybe that’s a reasonable sum for the work entailed, but I can’t recall ever seeing numbers that high for any kind of crowdfunded projects or open source support. Is asking for that kind of money realistic?

Re: Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

#135

Post by riveducha »

jgilias wrote: post #103
otrahuevada wrote: post #45

A good compromise for this kinds of things is usually dual licensing: - If you're big enough to make real money and you need my attention then pay me this much please - If you're some rando with a toy project, then we have a github issue tracker A project this size and age should always have a lawyer at hand just in case, and they should be able to walk the maintainers through the process of dual-licensing everything…

What you suggest is not really dual licensing though. It's a source-available license with a free tier. Dual licensing means that there are two licenses that the user can choose from at their discretion . This is why GPL may work together with a commercial license but not MIT, as businesses have reasons to avoid GPL.

It sounds like otrahuevada is describing the same thing, doesnt it? Choose a commercial license if you want support, or the open source license if you don’t. That is how I understood it.

Re: Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

#136

Post by SirSourdough »

aspenmayer wrote: post #134
bmn__ wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one wants to pay for that either. https://c-ware.de/en/cf-listing-page/

What is up with those fundraising goals? Due to weird scaling, the number of 0s in the goal overflow onto each other, but it looks like you’re asking for hundreds of thousands or millions of euros to port things. Maybe that’s a reasonable sum for the work entailed, but I can’t recall ever seeing numbers that high for any kind of crowdfunded projects or open source support. Is asking for that kind of money realistic?

I think most of them are in the the €5,000-20,000 range and there’s an issue with rendering the numbers that is duplicating the decimal value after the comma. Seems in line with other projects / compensation sources on the face of things.

Re: Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

#137

Post by ranma42 »

aspenmayer wrote: post #134
bmn__ wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one wants to pay for that either. https://c-ware.de/en/cf-listing-page/

What is up with those fundraising goals? Due to weird scaling, the number of 0s in the goal overflow onto each other, but it looks like you’re asking for hundreds of thousands or millions of euros to port things. Maybe that’s a reasonable sum for the work entailed, but I can’t recall ever seeing numbers that high for any kind of crowdfunded projects or open source support. Is asking for that kind of money realistic?

German-style number delimitors: '.' for thousands and ',' for the fractional part So the highest targets are 20000 EUR, which seems very reasonable. I think it's a bit silly to include the Eurocents though...

Re: Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

#138

Post by SloopJon »

phoronixrly wrote: post #21

Developments like this one and the faker.js and colors.js fiasco from last week have made me rethink my position about licensing. Now it seems to me that releasing code you wrote for free under a permissive open-source license is somewhere between ill-advised and unethical. On one hand it will not benefit you in any way, on the other, it will be incorporated in a company's proprietary project thus lowering the expens…

> it will be incorporated in a company's proprietary project thus lowering the expenses necessary to develop it

Without necessarily taking a position on the ethics, I would point to macOS and its derivatives as a clear example of this. Apple invested significant resources into a successor to System 7 called Copland, abandoning it in 1996. While the purchase of NeXT in 1997 hugely influenced the design of OS X, look at all of the free and open source projects that accelerated its development: Mach, Clang/LLVM (and GCC before it), KHTML, KJS, CUPS, much of the BSD and GNU userland, and the list goes on.

macOS, and by extension iOS, would not be where it is today without its open source core. Put a little spit and polish on it (no small thing, of course), add a kernel extension named Don't Steal Mac OS X.kext, and voila: new O/S.

Re: Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

#139

Post by LadyCailin »

aspenmayer wrote: post #134
bmn__ wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one wants to pay for that either. https://c-ware.de/en/cf-listing-page/

What is up with those fundraising goals? Due to weird scaling, the number of 0s in the goal overflow onto each other, but it looks like you’re asking for hundreds of thousands or millions of euros to port things. Maybe that’s a reasonable sum for the work entailed, but I can’t recall ever seeing numbers that high for any kind of crowdfunded projects or open source support. Is asking for that kind of money realistic?

The highest was €20k. Your browser was just doing something weird. Anyways, a totally reasonable sum for a couple of months of full time dev work.

Re: Apache PLC4X announcing end of community support due to missing funding

#140

Post by adament »

jgilias wrote: post #103
otrahuevada wrote: post #45

A good compromise for this kinds of things is usually dual licensing: - If you're big enough to make real money and you need my attention then pay me this much please - If you're some rando with a toy project, then we have a github issue tracker A project this size and age should always have a lawyer at hand just in case, and they should be able to walk the maintainers through the process of dual-licensing everything…

What you suggest is not really dual licensing though. It's a source-available license with a free tier. Dual licensing means that there are two licenses that the user can choose from at their discretion . This is why GPL may work together with a commercial license but not MIT, as businesses have reasons to avoid GPL.

I understood the parent post to suggest dual licensing where the commercial license also gives you paid support. I.e. if you expect support pay up by buying a commercial license. Though I see no reason to conflate the two things. I would suggest in this case not even having a public issue tracker, and make your open source offering a take it or leave it proposition.
Post reply on HN