What exactly does Open Source mean?
I’ve been using a lot of open source scripts. Generally I’ve found them to be fabulous. They work well, have communities of users and developers ready to offer support and answer questions, and offer a variety of functionality, and all that’s expected of a user is a linkback and, if he or she is capable, some contribution to the community as a quid pro quo for the use of the script and for receiving support from the community. Those who have bucks are encouraged to make a donation to help cover server costs and such, but it’s never a requirement for use of the script or for support. This system is generally pretty fine most times.
A script I installed recently, however, seems to be using the GPL and the tag “open source” in a way that leaves a really bad taste in my mouth. It’s a shame, since the script is actually very, very good, much better than similar scripts out there.
The scam seems to be that you don’t get anything much from the development team unless you’ve ante’d up a “donation” to the effort. Now I know that most open source communities have a paypal button and it is expected that if you get good use out of a script and make a few bucks with it you contribute back in some way to help cover hosting/server costs, something I’ve done on a couple scripts I’ve used a lot. But this request for bucks from most of the open source community is usually something that is very low-key. In this particular instance it isn’t- it’s very blatant and borderline offensive.
The developer team for the particular script I’m speaking about, PHP Link Directory, isn’t low key about “donation requests” at all. In fact, there are many, many posts from script users on the “support” board asking for an answer to a question where the developer team have responded by “suggesting” that a donation would result in an answer. There are a few script users who post on the board who get a response right away- most likely they’re the ones who have reached into their pockets.
What I find particularly offensive is the fact that it doesn’t matter whether you’ve contributed in other ways, ie helping answer support questions on the forum, which I’ve done a lot in the two weeks I’ve been working with this script. If you haven’t come across with the dough, you most likely won’t get satisfaction. Though I’ve received answers to a couple questions, others have been answered with this “suggestion” that I fund the script.
Am I the only one who finds this pimping for dough using the GPL/Open Source label a gross misuse of same?
August 16th, 2005 at 2:36 pm
[quote]Am I the only one who finds this pimping for dough using the GPL/Open Source label a gross misuse of same?[/quote]
Oh no! Not at all! You are definitely NOT alone here as I’ve noted the same situation on the same script’s dev forum. It’s offensive in the extreme and seems to make mockery of both the GPL (under which phpLD is released) and the whole concept of open source.
August 24th, 2005 at 10:04 pm
Well, I agree about the “pimping” part but what about those posts that sound like this:
“Great script, but it needs X and Y to be better. I can really use this so lease do it as soon as possible.”
Those seem to balance out the “if you give me money I will add features” posts. It is definitely best to see neither.
As the formerly-known-as-Mambo project is proving, it is the community and developers combined that hold value.
August 24th, 2005 at 10:28 pm
“it is the community and developers combined that hold value.” — I could not agree more. The problem with the pimping for money is that it scares away or grosses out the people who really would contribute otherwise. If you’re begging for features and not contributing, that’s as bad as begging for dough before offering support. Luckily the situation at the forum that started me off on this topic seems to be clearing up somewhat, as I mention in other posts on this blog, and I’m happy to see it. It’s become a team effort, at least so far, and I truly hope it continues.