Re: MS STL now open source (and using Boost)

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-09-18 10:35:07

On 2019-09-18 11:31, Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:
> Boost - Dev mailing list wrote
>> On 2019-09-17 20:35, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
>>>
>>> b) I think its time to seriously start to consider ideas about who open
>>> source authors can get compensated for their efforts are widely used.
>>
>> If you (not personally you - in general) are looking for material
>> compensation for your work then you've probably come to the wrong
>> project. Not that rewarding developer's work is bad, but when you
>> release source code under BSL or any other open source license, you have
>> to understand that that act of release alone does not ensue compensation
>> in return. In other words, you're not selling your code in a project
>> like Boost, you're gifting it. Though you may receive immaterial
>> compensation, like recognition among fellow developers and a nice line
>> in your resumé.
> 
> There are situations when an open source software developer is
> perfectly entitled to expect compensation from users of her/his
> software.

Yes, of course, but that is an agreement between users and the developer 
that does not follow from the act of the source release. Often, quite 
the opposite. For example, the developer may agree to implement a 
feature for a certain payment. As part of that agreement, he may or may 
not release that source code afterwards, and the conditions/license of 
such release may be different from when he implements something else for 
free for the same project. IOW, if you simply release a piece of code, 
you cannot expect to be paid for it. For that you have to sell it, in 
one way or another.

Specifically in Boost, we don't sell code and don't receive any payment 
for our work on libraries. So if someone comes here in hope to be 
rewarded for his work, that expectation is wrong. There may be cases 
when the time a maintainer spends on Boost is paid for by his employer 
or that the library is maintained outside Boost on paid basis and the 
Boost version is the "free" version or something like that, but in any 
case, the developer is not receiving compensation from the Boost project.

> A successful project can easily become a maintenance hassle
> then satisfaction, self-fulfillment and good looking resume
> are not enough to keep things rolling.

Of course. There are plenty reasons to want to receive compensation, and 
there's nothing wrong with it.

> The GPL, for example, makes it clear that should the program prove
> defective, she/he assumes the cost of all necessary servicing,
> repair or correction:
> https://media.ccc.de/v/bucharest-322-the-secret-life-of-open-source-developers

In this case "she/he" is the user, not the developer. Pretty much any 
open source license contains a disclaimer that lifts any damage/losses 
responsibility from the developer.