zlacker

>>zdw+(OP)
tl;dr anyone? (Pretty please)

>>cpach+tM5
I've listened to only 2/3 of it, but: he promotes Crystal+Lucky (crystal is compiled) as good replacements for Ruby and Rails. The second part of his talk is about promoting a new variant of open license called PostOpen, which will require commercial users of Post Open software to pay 1% for using, 1.5% for using without sharing modifications. There is a 10% fee for worse offense. All percentages are percentages of revenue. This is partly aimed at large companies that host open source software with few modifications as a service and charge for it. Money goes to PostOpen and possibly conventional Open Source developers.

>>george+OO5
I think any license that requires a percentage of revenue is DOA.

First because involving all the chicanery of accounting to figure out my fee is asking for lots of resources just to calculate and audit fees.

Second, unpredictable costs are bad. If my company’s revenue doubles in a year, that doesn’t mean that my department’s budget doubles. Or that I even have enough earnings to cover licenses.

Finally, this is hard enough with a single product. My org uses thousands of products. If they all charge 1%, where does that leave me.

PS- morally this just seems dumb. If my grocery store charged me more or less depending on my income or the value I derive from a tomato, I won’t shop there. Just publish a price and let people decide to buy or not.

>>prepen+U56
What if only companies above some revenue threshold were charged? Would you feel differently if licenses had a progressive fee of some kind?

>>throwa+ok7
I don’t sell software so this is just theoretical. But I wouldn’t want to know my customers’ revenue. That’s too much work and not my business.

I also wouldn’t buy software that had a cost contingent because I wouldn’t want that kind of relationship with my software vendor. Of course, this happens now with enterprise software where a big company will get a quote for $5 and a little company will get a quote for $1. But having something explicit is illogical since software is a near zero marginal cost product.

But even for real world stuff, I’d never hire a gardener who charged differently based on customers income.