[pavanky]

I can not answer the other questions, so I'll let John handle that part. I can answer this:

> If you're earning all the money with consulting and support, how do you allocate ressources to the further development of the library? Do your software engineers enjoy working on your company's product the same as working on client projects?

This is a question we have debated a lot internally. The shortest answer is that our experience building the product bring in the customers. The customer requirements can drive further development of the product.

Choosing the appropriate open source license (BSD-3 clause in this case), helps us reuse a lot of our code in a wide variety of situations.

[beagle3]

> Choosing the appropriate open source license (BSD-3 clause in this case), helps us reuse a lot of our code in a wide variety of situations.

If I understand it correctly, since you wrote the code and own the rights, you can do this regardless of the license you chose; e.g., you could have done an AGPL-3 release to the public, and continue giving license-to-use-and-modify-but-not-release to customers.

Am I misunderstanding?

[pavanky]

You are technically right, but in my experience a few companies either do not understand this or do not want to risk it for legal reasons.

BSD 3-clause on the other hand is very easy to understand and is permissive off the bat.