151–160 of 193 posts
Currently it deals with rudimentary Python and Node.js workflows, but contributions are naturally welcome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"including no company funds any part of it, including paying people to work on it(?!)" JetBrains open source licenses have a similar restriction https://www.jetbrains.com/opensource/ > Your project is NOT sponsored by a commercial company or organization and does NOT have paid employees > Your project does NOT provide commercial services (such as consulting or training) around the software, and does NOT distribute pa…
I have worked on many many open source projects. I don't think I have ever worked on any where there wasn't a single person writing code while getting paid by their employer. Is that enough to disqualify you from JetBrains criteria, do you think? In email from travis support it was expressed as: > Project must not be sponsored by a commercial company or organization (monetary or with employees paid to work on the pro…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd love to hear that story as well, and the nature of the legally binding promises you managed to make.
It's probably too soon. Over the course of my career, I've encountered a significant number of really juicy stories that I tend not to explain, as there's a lot to lose and not very much to gain. Traditionally, the purpose of autobiography is to tell all of these stories.
I've got enough potential liability piled up there that I think some of these stories will only come out once I'm good and dead. Not just legal liability -- although I did sign an NDA/non-disparage -- bringing up dirt from past businesses is like mudwrestling with a pig: everyone ends up looking dirty.
In this case, I'm glad to say I acted with complete integrity at every point, but knowing the parties involved, we'd end up in a cesspool of rumors and falsehoods, and no one would come out looking clean.
Live. Learn. Move onto the next business. Give advice in generics. Some people will believe you, and others won't.
Only a few weeks ago they wrote a letter ( https://blog.travis-ci.com/oss-announcement ) that said "Open source accounts, as always, will be completely free under travis-ci.com." Their home page at travis-ci.com still says: > Testing your open source projects is always 100% free! > Seriously. Always. We like to think of it as our way of giving back to a community that gives us so much as well. That is simply not what…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's probably too soon. Over the course of my career, I've encountered a significant number of really juicy stories that I tend not to explain, as there's a lot to lose and not very much to gain. Traditionally, the purpose of autobiography is to tell all of these stories.
This is exactly the case. I've got enough potential liability piled up there that I think some of these stories will only come out once I'm good and dead. Not just legal liability -- although I did sign an NDA/non-disparage -- bringing up dirt from past businesses is like mudwrestling with a pig: everyone ends up looking dirty. In this case, I'm glad to say I acted with complete integrity at every point, but knowing…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have worked on many many open source projects. I don't think I have ever worked on any where there wasn't a single person writing code while getting paid by their employer. Is that enough to disqualify you from JetBrains criteria, do you think? In email from travis support it was expressed as: > Project must not be sponsored by a commercial company or organization (monetary or with employees paid to work on the pro…
We were denied a renewal of JetBrains' software because we pay several people to work on our open source software. We then realised we didn't need the license, as the community edition has everything we need.
But to move to one of the licensing models on their pricing page requires us to start to pay per-user. How many seats should we buy? I have no idea. Right now, if someone who's given one or two drive-by patches wants their own space on the project, we just give it to them. If it cost us an extra $50/year (or $240/year or $1200/year depending on our tier) for such users, what's the cut-off for who gets to be part of the project? It just changes the whole calculus.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of the reason to make promises is that they are legally enforceable: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/promissory_estoppel.asp When I started an organization which was taken over in a rather hostile way, I was very careful to make a bunch of legally-binding promises before the takeover happened, to help prevent it from becoming too evil.
IANAL, but I don't think that would be applicable in this case: > Another requirement further qualifies the required detriment component; the promisee must have suffered an actual substantial detriment in the form of an economic loss that results from the promisor failing to deliver on his or her promise. Finally, promissory estoppel is usually only granted if a court determines that enforcing the promise is essentia…
1) Travis achieved a market-dominant position in part thanks to widespread use by open source projects.
2) Open source projects invested significant resources into integrating with Travis based on their promise.
3) Moving to something else would take significant resources. The exact loses are probably exactly how much it would cost to pay to continue to use Travis (and collecting some of that money is precisely why Travis stopped offering a free service). If it wasn't significant, Travis wouldn't have made the change.
That doesn't mean it's worth anyone's time to litigate.
As a footnote, the traditional way to handle something like this is to continue to provide a free service, but to make it worse and worse and worse. Travis could satisfice the promise by keeping an insecure Raspberry Pi under someone's desk running old code as the "server farm" for open source. Courts don't necessarily consider satisificing to be following through on a promise, but costs of litigation go way up when there are open legal questions like that. At that point, it's usually almost definitely not worth anyone's time to litigate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are there any evidence of private equity providing benefits for society? Sometimes it looks like they have a inverse Midas hand, everything they touch putrefy.
I am not sure if it counts as providing a benefit to society but I think the Dell private equity process(taken private in 2013 and reintroduced to the public market in 2018) is generally considered a success from a business standpoint. As mentioned in sibling comments, a lot of private equity investments are an attempt to do something similar.
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:zDTt0E...
Many people are saying to those of us who _haven't_, for one reason or another, gotten completely off of Travis CI, "the writing was on the wall" or "you can't expect free forever." And I think they're missing the gravity of the situation—there were (and are still) a _ton_ of OSS projects out there that are configured to use Travis CI for their testing and build pipelines, and it's not free to switch to something els…
Github Actions is free. I migrated some repos to Github Actions this year and the process is relatively painless.
Also I do not expect Microsoft to turn off Github Actions for OSS projects as long as you stay within your rate limited budget.
Travis CI made their exit few months ago with a Venture Firm , every venture firm use the same model of "Hibernation" to get cashflow from the platform without new investment.
Only two option to do so :
- increasing price
- reducing cost
Removing the "0$" price for Open Source Project is a disguised way to increase the price...
It's likely the majority of the staff was laid off and the project is now hibernating living from acquired customers not adding new feature or change.
Just being used as a source of Corporate Cash Flow.