• NaN@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m not so sure. I think he has a point that if someone forks, he can still merge those changes back in and still work on things for his paying customers too. I think the number of people who are willing to write patches is a lot smaller than the number who are going to complain. He seems to welcome forks anyway (I’m sure his attitude would be, “let them provide the free support!”). This post is two years old, it might be interesting to see how his project is doing and how many forks there are.

    There are a lot of users of open source projects who do act as if they are owed a resolution to every issue they encounter. While I don’t agree with the nuclear option I can’t really blame him.

    • Carlos Solís@communities.azkware.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      To be fair, it looks like he’d be much happier writing proprietary software in the first place. His goal is evidently to get a source of sustenance first, and to help the community with code second if at all. And in proprietary software it’s already customary to expect no support whatsoever (sometimes not even patches to existing, already paid software) unless you pay for the privilege.