Re:The Great CoffeeScript to Typescript Migration of 2017
by dccoolgai on Saturday May 16, 2020 @08:55AM
(#23203005)
And "they don't contribute" is one of the _less_ harmful things. Look at what Amazon did to Elastic/search.
Re:The Great CoffeeScript to Typescript Migration of 2017
by wlll on Saturday May 16, 2020 @09:03AM
(#23203047)
What did Amazon do to Elasticsearch?
Re:The Great CoffeeScript to Typescript Migration of 2017
by dccoolgai on Saturday May 16, 2020 @10:37AM
(#23203708)
Took Elastic's product (Elasticsearch), forked it and started selling it under the same name. It's a cautionary tale for anyone thinking about running a business based on OSS. https://www.google.com/amp/s/searchaws.techtarget.com/news/2...
Re:The Great CoffeeScript to Typescript Migration of 2017
by wlll on Saturday May 16, 2020 @11:25AM
(#23204148)
Gotcha, thanks!
Re:The Great CoffeeScript to Typescript Migration of 2017
by appleflaxen on Saturday May 16, 2020 @10:37AM
(#23203701)
yeah; can you elaborate?
This is the heart of a really important issue in OSS that affects everything good and bad about the scene.
There are companies that pretty much waste millions on poorly managed projects but won't donate the few thousand needed to make a lot of OSS projects succeed while still using the software.
It doesn't help that a lot of the culture just accepts fragile dependencies (who cares if this semi-crucial dependency is managed by the equivalent of newman from jurrasic park), and that a lot of the biggest OSS projects are usually made by people working at some big company. Maybe copyleft licenses would've prevented some of these issues, but I am not sure individual users like those restrictions even if, in some ways, it would benefit the community as a whole.
Its absolutely disgraceful how little financial support some really commonly used libraries get.