Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by remram 544 days ago
The constant spam from Forgejo supporters who "are the only true OSS" is very tiring.

I don't understand the distinction. If I can get one car for free that doesn't have a car seat, or I can get another car for free for which I can get a car seat (at a cost)... why is the first one superior? Why is the "no paid addon" a good thing if it doesn't have the addon at all? It obviously doesn't benefit people who need car seat, but does it even benefits the ones who don't?

The core of "open core" products is open source, as per the OSI definition. What do you all want?
2 comments
thecrash 543 days ago
It has to do with the way power and incentives are configured within the project, and therefore what can be expected of the maintainers in the future.

For some people/use cases, the threat of developers rug-pulling a tool you depend on is not a big deal as long as it's good right now. But in many situations the tool which has less features but also less incentive to rug-pull wins out.

link
remram 543 days ago
Anyone can "rug-pull" a project, whether it currently has non-free features or not. You can't retract already-published versions, but anyone can make non-free plugins or forks for existing MIT-licensed code (GitLab and Gitea are MIT).

I guess some might think that because they do non-free parts now they are likely to make more of it non-free later, is that the argument? If yes I don't really like this Minority Report approach to judging projects for what you think they might do.

link
thecrash 542 days ago
> because they do non-free parts now they are likely to make more of it non-free later, is that the argument

Yes, that's one indicator of how the incentives are structured, though there are other factors to consider too - mostly regarding where the money comes from and who is involved in the decision-making.

Perhaps you find it dystopian that people make predictions about future behavior and use them to inform their decisions about who to trust. It's very common though, and is the basis for the concept of reputation.

link
ThrowawayR2 543 days ago
The parent post highlights one of the core reasons behind the failure of FOSS: its growth was built on a base that cared only about the gratis aspect without any real interest in the libre aspect. They're perfectly happy to take any FOSS they can get for free and pay for any proprietary software needed with the money they saved.
link
remram 543 days ago
If you have to do something in exchange then it's not gratis OR libre. Whether that's enforced by law or community shaming.
link