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 resumeÌ.
> There are situations when an open source software developer is
> perfectly entitled to expect compensation from users of her/his
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:
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.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk