#OpenCore means "we won't accept the contribution you worked hard to implement on your own dime and time because we need to keep it a proprietary feature in the Enterprise Edition".
#FreeSoftware #OpenSource #FOSS #OSS #SoftwareFreedom #Community #COSS
https://github.com/hoppscotch/hoppscotch/pull/3266#issuecomment-1984106576
@attie @filippo @msw @brown so the thing about Open Core and such, it's not community led, so all those adages about the maintainers being overworked and doing their best and so on? that all goes out the window
they don't have your best interests in mind, and you shouldn't have theirs either; only yours
@whitequark @attie @msw @brown I’m not convinced open source maintainers need to be overworked to be valid, or that they should work primarily for the common good, or what community led means exactly.
I like https://jacobian.org/2024/feb/16/paying-maintainers-is-good/ on this.
But also sure, have your own best interests in mind. No need to support the maintainers. Still not entitling you to have your PR merged.
@whitequark @attie @msw @brown I think being in a transactional relationship with some open source projects is fine, is my point.
@whitequark @filippo @attie @msw @brown as long as we recognize that being transactional can take a lot of positive dynamics off the table. You start thinking about the relationship thus: there is a vendor (whether indy developer or VC backed startup) that produces the software. They make all the decisions on how it’s developed. They become the sole place where users go for support. Users don’t have incentives to scratch itches.
@whitequark @robryk @msw @attie @brown that, or because what you get out of the upstreaming transaction is convenient distribution for your patch to an audience you care about and that you want to have access to that patch
@robryk @msw @filippo @attie @brown exclusively to reduce your own workload (in maintaining a patch series on top of it)