I think the question still deserves a proper answer.
No it doesn't. No opensource dev need to answer anything, if you dont like it, fork it and do the work yourself.
Maybe it can be better phrased as "I think this question doesn't deserve that answer"
No, open-source maintainers don't owe you anything if you don't pay for it
I have similar problems with product I do pay for, and I still get told I have no say. FO/OSS distinction is a red herring.
At some point it need to be made clear; it's not a legal obligation, but a reputational challenge.
Please observe a policy of extreme wisdom: https://github.com/Fody/Home/blob/master/pages/licensing-pat...
Are you being ironic or serious? I can see both pros (encourage people to see themselves as customers) and cons (less initial adoption) to the licensing, although I'd maybe leave bug issues open for everybody.
What aspect do you think dominates?
The answer is because YOU haven’t fixed it yet. Chop chop, we’re all waiting on you.
No it doesn't. No opensource dev need to answer anything, if you dont like it, fork it and do the work yourself.
Maybe it can be better phrased as "I think this question doesn't deserve that answer"
No, open-source maintainers don't owe you anything if you don't pay for it
I have similar problems with product I do pay for, and I still get told I have no say. FO/OSS distinction is a red herring.
At some point it need to be made clear; it's not a legal obligation, but a reputational challenge.
Please observe a policy of extreme wisdom: https://github.com/Fody/Home/blob/master/pages/licensing-pat...
Are you being ironic or serious? I can see both pros (encourage people to see themselves as customers) and cons (less initial adoption) to the licensing, although I'd maybe leave bug issues open for everybody.
What aspect do you think dominates?
The answer is because YOU haven’t fixed it yet. Chop chop, we’re all waiting on you.