Re: [tlug] GPL vs. paid version and ethics

[Jamie Learmonth <jamie-lists@example.com>]

On 5 Aug 2012, at 04:07, Darren Cook wrote:

If they host the source code, they could refuse to accept the patch, so
I'd have to branch, and then there are two versions going forward.

This scenario is inevitable if they are supplying features which are in demand and have

open sourced their software. It's something they will need to adapt for, more than once.

But I also wondered about the ethics. If I added that feature I cut into
their sales. Financing for the product goes down. Product quality goes
down. Well, in, one scenario.

Their business won't rely on a single feature. Submit a patch, if it gets refused then make

the patch publicly available. The people who find your patch don't want to pay those guys 

anyways just for that one feature, that's why they've searched for a patch. It's not a question

of ethics, it's a question of can your team of paid staff members create more value than hobbyists.

Jamie