|
|
|
|
|
by dijit
32 days ago
|
|
Long-time Zulip advocate; I've (successfully) pushed for it at two organisations, so genuinely, thanks for building something worth that effort. One thing I'd like to understand better: how does the Foundation intend to keep its mandate narrow? The Mozilla comparison in the post is one I find cuts both ways... technically excellent product, foundation that drifted considerably from "make the browser good." The advisory board has some names I associate with community governance work beyond the purely technical. That's not necessarily a problem, but I'd love to hear how the Foundation thinks about scope creep, and whether there's anything structural that keeps the focus on shipping great software. |
|
I think the question presupposes that we solve the hardest problem for a new non-profit: Funding. We would be very lucky if Zulip with 1% of Mozilla's funding; we could do so so much with that scale of resources.
The biggest risk to Zulip's ability to succeed over the next few years is not risk of spending time on side projects. It's risk of not having the financial resources even to hire remarkable people who want to take a big pay cut to work on Zulip.