Dear Open Source: let’s do a better job of asking for money

Re:Dear Open Source: let’s do a better job of asking for money by hgs3 on Tuesday February 28, 2023 @09:19PM (#34977935)

Rather than releasing under the MIT license, I'm wondering if the authors had considered duel licensing their code under a strong copyleft license, like the GPL, and selling closed-source licenses? I'm considering doing this in addition to paid support and feature requests as mentioned in the blog.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Dear Open Source: let’s do a better job of asking for money by 255kb on Wednesday March 01, 2023 @02:33AM (#34979728)

This is something I thought about for a while. But isn't using MIT contributing to the project popularity? Also, my project is a desktop application, so I think people don't really care if it's MIT or GPL. Maybe it makes more sense if it's a library.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Dear Open Source: let’s do a better job of asking for money by junon on Wednesday March 01, 2023 @03:50PM (#34988142)

> But isn't using MIT contributing to the project popularity?

Yes, definitely.

[ Parent | on HN ]