[bontoJR]

I truly liked your point. Just one tiny detail: you don't really look to be against OS per se, but against the current movement that is basically pushing to open everything and do stuff that nobody really need.

I was thinking about funding projects (f.e.) like Grails, recently left alone by Pivotal and rescued by Apache. I am against funding blindly too, but my point is to fund projects that already have defined a list of features, milestones and delivery time.

[jmolinaso]

Exactly, I'm in favor of open source, but I'm against of open sourcing something useless and drain funds that might be useful in somewhere else. The example I get in mind is the gnupg project, that guy almost got broke for such an important tool.

Your idea is nice, and I won't discourage to pursue, those projects might need some kind of air to survive until something/someone finds it back, and get them back to the spotlight.

An Open Source project can be a bold idea, or it can be an advance scam system, for the first possibility I'm not against as some good projects might come from a bold idea, who am I to close that, but the second one, the community has to protect itself.

Something I dislike from the current situation of the linux userland status is the amount of programs or libraries that you might need and for the next version, some parts of your code are incompatible, and no way to ask any fix as it is open source you can get the sources to fix it, but not the time to do it.