Is it about the license? I see less and less new projects using GPL, and a lot of MIT(ish) licenses.
replyMost complex open source projects like Linux for example have a lot of contributions by corporations. The GPL kind of forces them to participate in open source, instead of just creating internal forks.
GPL and even LGPL are tricky for libraries though.
I think it's more about the bait and switch marketing optics of offering a "core" part of your codebase as "FOSS" to get the extra brownie points by doing so, while it's at the same time littered with caveat emptors, and imports from "enterprise licensed" code for the features that business care about.
replyAlso all the "commercial open source" or COSS seems to lean into that, its a valid strategy to monetize open source, but should be done transparently and being very upfront about its bait-y nature to businesses or enterprises imho
> "features that business care about"
replyI don't see companies using open source lining up to support the developers. Good for developers to come up with some monetization strategies to keep their software alive.
deleted
replydeleted
reply