[apatters]

Elementary's problem is it has two inexperienced founders who aren't negotiating with each other very well, I'd hardly call it a meltdown, nor particularly relevant to the examples in this article.

The entrepreneur in me will never understand this problem: "programmer creates world famous software used by Microsoft and NASA and doesn't make any money and is burning out from all the work."

Here are your solutions:

1) If the users want support, charge them for it. Split the proceeds with someone who will actually do the support. If it's still too much work, raise the price.

2) If the users want features, charge them money to put those features on your roadmap. If they're asking for features you don't want to add, just raise the price or say no until they go away.

Here is what will happen when you ask for money: people you don't want to deal with will disappear. Also you'll have more money, and you will work less.

Do you need to think about business a bit somewhere in there, sure, but probably a lot less than most people think. The "business side" for the Grunt guy could probably be "register an LLC online then get an Upwork account and let them handle the other shit like your payments and tax forms for 5%." Yes, fucking Upwork.

[yakak]

There's nothing wrong with a consulting model yet I wouldn't use code under their direct/complete control. Plenty of Apache Projects have members that are in consultant companies, their willingness to make changes for cash is balanced by other orgs that only want to contribute directly, ensure existing functionality, etc.