Quite strange, I have my last publications posted here downvoted without any comment, and I don’t know why. This is kind of unfair because FMPOV it is just hyperlinks maybe interesting or useful, at least for me and other people I know. But it’s the life, it’s social networks, it’s people and I don’t care that much ✌️ Please, leave comments instead ✌️
Very interesting topic in fact, I am not sure a unique and perfect solution exists.
In fact, it depends to how much you earn, how matter does for you the project, how big it is, etc. It is a question of feelings after all.
For example you may want to donate $20 one time to a useful tool you use, but for an app you enjoy using which match your own values you may want to send each year $50. But for some people it is complicated to give money, they need to satisfy their own needs before and people don’t have all the same incomes.
FMPOV, if the project is “just a tool” it can be a $20 one shot. If I use the software daily, it can be $50 per year. Maybe more if I feel it will help.
About the transaction medium, it depends. Projects can use Liberapay, others PayPal or Open Collective, or also in-app purchases. I don’t use cryptocurrencies because of the transactions fees.
Hope it helps!
Ok, you are ight, fixed the publication and will dig deeper with my Lemmy app to check if an improvement can be done :) Thanks!
Sorry, not used to my Lemmy client, still not found how to do that. Quite a newbie, I will take more care next times. Thank you for your comment.
40
60% of Open-Source Maintainers Are Unpaid: It's Concerning & What We Can Do About it
(programming.dev)
Thank you for your comment 😅
That is the reason why some developers are “full stack”. All computers are stacked 🤪
Yeah, reach the FSF like explained in previous comments. Or maybe contact some attorney if it matters because you may face expensive litigations… Big companies are not friendly. Or maybe contact the SFC (https://sfconservancy.org/).
Maybe Futo should move to “post open source” like “open core” principles.
Today majority of standards rely on definition accepted by a majority of people since decades, i.e. the open source definition by the OSI (https://opensource.org/osd), the free / libre definition of the FSF (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html), and the principles of ethical source by the OES (https://ethicalsource.dev/what-we-believe/). Trying to apply new definitions is very hazardous, will induce lack of consistency and may make people more confused.
However, like the OES did for ethical source licences, defining a new group of ideas / licences with associated values seems to be more interesting, like few years ago with “open core”, and also “copyfarleft” and “copyjustright”.
In a nutshell, why changing the rules of the game instead of creating a new game? 🙂
Pure jerks, clowns and morons. Trying to redefine definition of open source is crazy, insane and irrelevant.
9
8
8
Thank you for sharing, for your information the original publication date was in 2018.
view more: next ›
Quite strange, I have my last publications posted here downvoted without any comment, and I don’t know why. This is kind of unfair because FMPOV it is just hyperlinks maybe interesting or useful, at least for me and other people I know. But it’s the life, it’s social networks, it’s people and I don’t care that much ✌️ Please, leave comments instead ✌️