News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by evv on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @10:40AM (#15238697)
I see the author, jskinner, is hanging out on this thread!

Have you ever considered open-sourcing SLT? This is your only route to immortalize this amazing piece of software. I'm sure you'd receive immense community contributions and widespread support. If you switch to a donation model + enterprise support plans, I think you're likely to earn greatly more than you currently do.

I love SLT and have used it throughout my career, but I still feel more comfortable depending on Atom because I know it will be supported by the community in the event that something bad happens with the ownership. If you don't open-source SLT, I sadly believe that open alternatives like Atom will outlive it.

Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by RazrFalcon on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:14PM (#15239694)
>I know it will be supported by the community

They won't. Projects like Atom and VSCode thrives because they have big companies behind them. Remove them - and the project will die.

There are tons of abandoned text editors on GiHub.

Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by Jarwain on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @10:43AM (#15238735)
If I were in his shoes, I would open-source the project once I decided I wanted to stop working on it, or when I feel I've made enough, or have it baked into my will to open source the project if the truly unfortunate happens.

Of course, with a team backing the project that changes the dynamic a bit

Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by ksec on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:27AM (#15239157)
Sometimes I wonder why there isn't a model, where its Author put up after Number of Copies sold, it will be open sourced.

Of Coz it wont be a small amount. It could be 25,000 copies. But then lot of companies, whom may like Sublime, could spend and join the race.

Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by stanmancan on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:32PM (#15239902)
If you spend years taking the risk and building a piece of software; why give it away once it's successful?
Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by nirvdrum on Thursday September 14, 2017 @01:37AM (#15245240)
Blender sorta did that. It was a closed source project that the authors said they would open source if the community raised €100,000. It succeeded and the software was subsequently made open source.
Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by captainmuon on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:56PM (#15240157)
It doesn't even have to be proper open source - just source open! Just dump the source and say people may not sell it, but they may study it and contribute back.

You're not loosing any income - honest people will continue to buy the license, and those who are not honest or cannot afford it will continue to not buy a license. But people will be put at ease about the bus factor. We will learn a lot about how to produce a snappy app with a multiplatform toolkit. And I'm sure people will contribute back great features.

Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by jhasse on Thursday September 14, 2017 @12:31PM (#15249604)
I guess many people won't contribute then.
Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by aloisdg on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @11:30AM (#15239197)
The lack of Open Source is my struggle too. I really want to use it, but I want to be able to browse the code.
Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by Acalyptol on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:04PM (#15239608)
Atom will die with Electron in a not so distant future.
Re:Sublime Text 3.0 by s73ver_ on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @02:09PM (#15240933)
"If you switch to a donation model + enterprise support plans, I think you're likely to earn greatly more than you currently do."

I'm curious as to what your evidence to back this statement up is. As is, most donation-ware ends up getting next to nothing in donations.