daniel_riel

So you're idea is to hope that some large company hires an FTE to contribute to your project full time? Sounds like a very poor bet.

Anyway, I would vastly rather they pay me to write the patch properly, the way I want it, the way I would have designed it. Much easier to maintain than than a drive-by patch.

As long as you are paid regular enterprise-software range fees, hiring your own freelancers to help you write patches is also easily achievable.

Perhaps the real trickery is the OSI's shady lawyer led campaign after they were denied the trademark on open-source(tm)

https://opensource.org/pressreleases/certified-open-source.p...

And after they had admitted that:

> While there is agreement on the broad term "open source" as meaning approximately what is captured in the Open Source Definition the term has, ironically, now become so popular that it has lost some of its precision.

https://web.archive.org/web/20060411080543/http://www.openso...

To pressure developers that believe in "open-source" as in the opposite of "closed-source", to also accept their entire anti-developer property "Free Software" ideology.

I agree with you.

If the choice is Open-Core vs Non OSI Approved License(tm) Open-Source, I definitely support the latter.

The OSI needs to be honest and push "OSI Approved Licenses(tm)"... Instead they're like the Simpson's Old Man Yells at Cloud meme, trying to pretend their special interest group has a trademark on "open-source"

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/old-man-yells-at-cloud

Even though they admit that trademark was denied

https://opensource.org/pressreleases/certified-open-source.p...