I agree we should support him, but you know who should be more concerned with giving him and other open source maintainers money? The billion dollar corporations that rely on these critical projects and use them absolutely for free. Amazon, Microsoft, Sony, Samsung, Google, Siemens, Motorola, God knows how many more.
But when open source projects go dual license to try and get paid people lose their minds.
What about a license that would require every company with a market cap above 25 B that (indirectly) uses the software to contribute X amount (like $1000 a year) of revenue back?
He probably needs a comaintainer. We could select one of us and then try pressuring him into accepting that.
We need more non profits who can set aside funds for these projects. It not like these companies don’t want to help its just jot entirely clear how they can help.
Sure. But if the project in question only has one or two donation methods and none of those are supported by the company, then the company can’t easily donate anything. Companies usually have a strict way of how they can donate and it usually entails Paypal or some other costly solution, while projects like that likely just has a patreon or LibrePay option and perhaps a crypto wallet. Most companies can’t work with that.
Samsung is the primary developer for Tizen, a Linux based OS similar to Android. Their watches, cameras, and TVs run it.
I gotta hand it to Samsung that they outline all the open source licences they use, at least in their Galaxy smartphone products:
