The After Open Source Era Has Started

very interesting read

From the article, an awesome chart.

I’m not against Shared Source as a label for the emerging movement … although I like Fair Source better :wink:

Keeping the source partially open is primarily for marketing and user adoption purposes rather than collaborative development and keeping software useful for everybody.

Nope! It’s for collaborative development by everyone, including core maintainers who need to have time to work on it.

I guess underlining cash OR contribution is expected of for profit companies would be interesting to state up front. I should think about what I want for some of my Prosperity licensed software.

We will see projects starting as open source during bootstrapping and initial adoption phases, and then transition to source available licenses when threatened by more operationally mature competitors.

I don’t think so. More people certainly in business who start companies are thinking about this up front, as are developers who have had open source experience.

There’s a whole piece in there about tokens that I don’t really buy.

I think we have more experience with governance and licenses like XLC and infrastructure like Open Collective, both of which don’t require entity formation, can lead to new things without going full token.

Would it be useful to draft up and publish a form agreement between a project maintainer and a contributor? Something that provides options for different kinds of payment—up-front, percentage of gross, cap or no cap—so maintainers of non-permissive projects can offer would-be contributors different economic deals?

1 Like

Yeah, I’m getting tired of “the future is some blockchain bullshit” buried 80% of the way through an otherwise-interesting-sounding article.

I agree: half the outrage at Elastic and Redis and Mongo carries the excuse of “they changed the license from open source to proprietary”, and if your database starts out under SSPL or whatever, people have to actually discuss the license on its own merits (although most will just make up a new excuse instead).

This got me reading Protocols, Not Platforms recently. I could probably write a megabyte of plain text on that paper, but I never really lost focus except around the blockchainy parts.

Ooh, that’s a good article, although I think it’d be better off with a deeper exploration of ActivityPub as present in Mastodon/Pleroma instead of blockchain hype.

1 Like

Yeah, I agree.

It’s also very much worth reading. But I don’t think we’re about to see a bunch of platforms turning into open protocols anytime soon. For reasons the paper largely and oddly acknowledges, but doesn’t really deal with.

I don’t think this should get written up ahead of need.

I do think a live conversation about exactly all those options would be amazing to have.

This forum, promote it a bit, see who has questions or needs, book a call. Start by going over Prosperity, then talk about different ways of charging.

Technically XLC would fit in here as well?

1 Like

Hi there,

thanks for sharing the article here and some constructive comments.

I’m not against Shared Source as a label for the emerging movement … although I like Fair Source better

For what I’m trying to describe in the article, I see as the most widely used term to be source available, and then shared source.
Fair Source - I’m not convinced about this term at all. By definition fair means - treating without favouritism or discrimination- which is the exact opposite of what some of these licenses do.

Nope! It’s for collaborative development by everyone, including core maintainers who need to have time to work on it.

Cannot agree with that either. Just today I came across another source available library which I cannot use for my project. If the library was open source, it would result into collaborative development. Now, it is a non-starter.

I came to realize, open source discussions are always perceived based on past experience and that varies wildly from person to person. There is a big difference how a large company looks into open source and how an individual maintainer does. It is very possible that we are talking about completely different issues here :slight_smile:

1 Like

I have to remind myself of this constantly. My mantra for it is “nobody sees all of open source”. But that’s just the way I ended up thinking about it.

1 Like