Why do I stop the OpenSource ?

[Astrobe]

On the other hand, I will continue to contribute to open source projects. Why would I do something so stupid, you may ask?

First of all, I've been benefiting from the work of tens of thousands of open source developers for over twenty years now. Almost every piece of software on my many computers is free and open. I've gotten immeasurable value out of this vast body of shared knowledge. I owe it to those people to pay it forward.

That's what I agree in full. I've spent thousands of hours playing free games and I'd like, in the future, to add a small contribution to the open-source community just to feel honest. And after all, information is free (or will be such) by its very nature.

I agree too. FOSS is all about contributing back. Be it code, translations, bug reporting, suggestions, helping other users, advertising...

> Why Microsoft and others are interested in the opensource?

Well, for one thing they have realized that selling bytes used to work in the 20th century, but not anymore - not really. Selling services and subscriptions (and user data to advertisers) is the way of the 21st century.

The other thing to note is that "Microsoft and others" are not actually leeches as you seem to think. Their engineers are actually contributing to FOSS software in order to make it more attractive because it is the foundation of their offer. So they are actually injecting money in FOSS.

[Linuxdirk]

The other thing to note is that "Microsoft and others" are not actually leeches as you seem to think. Their engineers are actually contributing to FOSS software in order to make it more attractive because it is the foundation of their offer. So they are actually injecting money in FOSS.

Embrace, extend, extinguish.

[sofar]

Minetest changed my life and I don't think this project would produce as much of opportunities if is was proprietary and closed-source. But there are always people who are fundamentally hostile to business.

^

Please read this. This is crucial here.

Open Source is a giant misconception. Everyone thinks it's about freebies. It's completely not. I don't want to go all Stallman on this thread, but, I'm afraid I have to to give JP's statement a bit more effect.

OSS is about people. When people share ideas freely, the people grow and become more knowledgeable as a whole. This gives people, and individuals the freedom to explore their passions and build their skills. And when people have decent skills, there will be a demand for them. Even if they're just beginners.

Even those folks who are "leeching off minetest" are going to turn around and contribute back. They are slowly going to gain skills and be a productive member of society, and meanwhile their business practices may help them pay for their families. There's not really much wrong with that.

When you give freely without expecting anything in return, you encourage others to do so as well.

Think about it in another way: When you drive the cost of software to zero, the most valuable thing is the people who make it.

[wziard]

Embrace, extend, extinguish.

This is (nearly) always the inofficial motto of the biggest dog in town. It used to be IBM, then it was Microsoft.
I guess today it's more Google than Microsoft. (google amp !!)

[LMD]

> Even those folks who are "leeching off minetest" are going to turn around and contribute back.
There are the ones that do so, and the ones that [url=https://github.com/FunKetApp/minetest]I am criticizing...[url]

But back to the discussion : I like open source and am learning each and every day. My entire setup is 99% open source, so I'm also "profiting" from open source, and thus also try to be giving back as well ;)

Besides, does anybody know good non commercial licenses for code ?

[bhree]

I'm not going to sell minetest or further development based on it, can't find something right with it. Or even monetize server (even when it turns out to be awesome) commercially or ads. But I will be very thankful when people give appreciation after I give technical assistance, training, original customization or anything original where nobody around can do. If people ask me help, i'll say it is me who helps you. When people ask me what I help them with? I'll say about this community, point them to more resource for free.

[sofar]

Besides, does anybody know good non commercial licenses for code ?

I posted several threads on this forum about how to choose a license, what licenses are good and bad - feel free to open a new thread and PM me the link - I'd be happy to discuss.

[runs]

> Even those folks who are "leeching off minetest" are going to turn around and contribute back.
There are the ones that do so, and the ones that [url=https://github.com/FunKetApp/minetest]I am criticizing...[url]

But back to the discussion : I like open source and am learning each and every day. My entire setup is 99% open source, so I'm also "profiting" from open source, and thus also try to be giving back as well ;)

Besides, does anybody know good non commercial licenses for code ?

Non commercial licenses do not follow the Minetest spiritual path, so they should avoided and are not recommended.

GPL is the best IMO.

[Gael de Sailly]

Because honestly, if we look at the majority of forks, they either advertise, sell our code or even try to destroy the original project or collect data. And you know what ? His people benefit because we can not do anything because we are idiots. Why piracy? When we voluntarily give them our code and often they will not publish the code. And even the minetest devs core will do nothing against them and even encourage bad behavior.

Glad that you finally understood this issue.

[...] But there are always people who are fundamentally hostile to business.

It's not about being "fundamentally hostile" to business (at least in my case). But what Chiantos is talking about, if I understand well, is more about the various Android adware forks.
The problem is not that it's business, but is that it's not a sane business. These forks are basically sponging off Minetest instead of producing something, and by the way feeding Google with the players' personal info and targeted ads. This is against the user's interests.

Even those folks who are "leeching off minetest" are going to turn around and contribute back. They are slowly going to gain skills and be a productive member of society, and meanwhile their business practices may help them pay for their families. There's not really much wrong with that.

It seems unlikely that people with this state of mind are going to contribute back. Minetest is nothing but their cash cow.

Making money of your small original creation is fine, making money of somebody else's work with little or no modification, and feeding the GAFA, is not.

Besides, does anybody know good non commercial licenses for code ?

Non-commercial would do the trick for this point, but we may also miss some opportunities. I do partly agree with jp on this, and I don't think most large open-source projects are totally free from business.

[Astrobe]

This really would be solved if the original FOSS software had more visibility. Nobody deliberately uses ads-ridden versions instead of the "clean" version. Ironically, advertisement is what would kill adware forks.

I would say instead of looking for and taking down illegal forks, invest your time in aggressively advertising FOSS software and the best sites that promote it.

There are tons of FOSS hub sites and at least two "Steam for FOSS" platforms, but ironically again, having multiple competing projects divides the resources and the visibility.

I think that it is something a big player like the Mozilla Foundation should do. FSF and GNU are kinda sort-of do it too, but (among other things) they are definitely not up to the task wrt to making FOSS accessible to the average person.

[Mantar]

This really would be solved if the original FOSS software had more visibility.

That's more or less true, though I don't think it's visibility that's the main problem. People like "free" and can go pretty far to get it.
These forks are competing with free, so to get people to pay or watch ads, they have to do something to make themselves more attractive. And I think I know what it is, or at least was.

Back when I tried the official Android Minetest client, it was a mess that couldn't connect to any servers, and the general response was that it wasn't going to be fixed and I should use the 0.5.0 beta -- which also couldn't connect to any servers, because they were all 0.4.x back then.
If the official Android client is a second-class project that can have showstopper bugs and still be uploaded to the Play store, it's no wonder it loses out to third party forks that actually work, if only with the burden of obnoxious ads.

No business can sell open source software for long without adding some sort of value. You have to figure out what that is and either provide it (putting them out of business), or accept that people will pay for whatever it is that you simply can't provide for free.* No matter which of those two choices you take, it's not a loss.
On the other hand, grinding your teeth over the fact that people will choose a polished, working client with ads over a clunky, busted free version is just spinning your wheels. It gets you nowhere.

* (See businesses which sell linux distros with support contracts. Sure you can download the ISO for free, but then you don't have a phone number to call when things go south, and businesses don't like having to fall back on free support from unpaid volunteers on the internet who may or may not know what they're doing, and may not answer at all.)