Au début, l'open source a été financé par la recherche académique. Le milieu étudiant a ensuite contribué, y trouvant un intérêt par passion, challenge ou pour se former. Cette main d'oeuvre gratuite tire aussi un large bénéfice par une formation gratuite, et à bénéficier de ces logiciels.

Les entreprises ont ensuite voulu tirer partis de ces logiciels gratuits. Elles ont eu besoin de leur rajouter certaines fonctionnalités, qui sont avantageusement données, sans avoir à les maintenir par la suite.
Ensuite, les logiciels développés en interne peuvent être amélioré lorsqu'ils sont mis à dispositions.
Parfois, mettre le logiciel en open-source est le moyen de devenir le standard (Android, Chrome).

Les gros logiciels ont un modèle de financement stable avec la vente de conseils d'experts (consulting), et dans une moindre proportion le don (des entreprises pour défiscaliser) ou des particuliers.
Les petits logiciels sont souvent financé par du bénévolat.

Et dans ces petits logiciels il y a des projets naissant et d’autres sans ambitions particulières. Il y a aussi beaucoup de projets ancien et pas toujours si petits mais qui sont plus crée pour le défi, le plaisir, l'histoire ou de la recherche fantasmatique.

L'open source encourage le code a être de qualité selon les différentes revues des pairs, et. Au contraire, une société éditrice est payée aux fonctionnalités et non à la qualité ou à l’efficacité du code.

Ce qui est extraordinaire dans l’open-source c’est la vitesse de détection des failles et le degré de qualité obtenu dans le code.

Les logiciels libres sont souvent publiés sous licence BSD, GPL, AGPL, Apache.

Il y a dans cet article une certaine confusion entre open source et libre, que je dois rappeler.

If one project using open source technology is successful, then the open source projets will benefit from it.

By default, if you are building with Nuxt, I want you to succeed. If you are a third-party provider with a great Nuxt module or integration, I want you to succeed.

Because

1. open source is a community project
2. compensation doesn't follow value
3. success is contagious

I realized that one of the best things about open source software is that you can solve a problem once and then you can slap an open source license on that solution and you will never have to solve that problem ever again, no matter who’s employing you in the future.

I like to say that my interest in open source is actually really selfish. I figured something out. I never want to have to do this work ever again.

I like to say that my interest in open source is actually really selfish. I figured something out. I never want to have to do this work ever again.

Technical debt ? It's not anymore if the dependency is vendored in the crate itself.

• know your audience
• careful with breaking changes
• document your way to features when the feature is out of scope of the project
• follow the tag on StackOverflow
• Micro-optimizations can matter

About dependency churn: how can we have less dependency?

In English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zigbee
En Français: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZigBee

Open source: you all should use open source and private services because we’re not a corporation out to exploit you or your data.

Disabled users: hey, your registration edit field is not labeled so I can’t use my adaptive technology to register or even use your platform. Could you fix it, because, right now, the mainstream/corporate offering has taken accessibility more seriously and I’d rather use a tool/service that I won’t need to struggle with in order to operate.

Open source: what exactly do you expect? We can’t be expected to make things accessible for you, so you can either fork it yourself or just not use our software/services. We’re a small team and corporation has more money than we do so they can devote more time and effort to accessibility. You can always fork the project though and make accessibility yourself!

Disabled user: well, I can’t code, so it looks like I don’t have any other choice but to go back to using this corporate offering that at least took the time to label their registration field correctly and actually took my request more seriously. Oh well, maybe open source tools just aren’t for me.

A great feedback from a main Nuxt contributor about Open Source contribution

I think open source is a chance to step outside the normal producer-consumer dichotomy and enter the world of relationships. [...] is a chance to give and receive.

How to start contributing?

• If you are new to a project (as to a company), you have a priceless gift. You can see more clearly than people who are already there. You might be in a perfect position to challenge 'received wisdom.' 💡
• If you care about a project, then you are in the best position to make it better.
• Contributing to open source is a phenomenal way to grow.

[about the tech stack with k8s] the payoff feels abstract and are hard to quantify.

It's the same for OSS dependencies.

what if platforms like AWS or GitHub started splitting the check? By adding a line-item to the invoices of their customers to support Open Source finding.

For example, 3% ?

OSS projects have no governance and most of them are not ready to receive money though. How to distribute this tax too?

Another model is to pay depending of how many developer there are in the company.

The second step after recognizing the OSS funding issue is having a baseline funding amount.

The Open Source ideology is misused by companies: its ideology concerns production (similarly to FLOSS). You contribute to the software back.

Copyleft can force an absolute minimal “contribution” back to your project, but it can’t force a good-faith one. This makes it an inadequate tool towards building something with the kinds of values that many developers care about.

But I do think I’ve properly identified the problem: many developers conceive of software freedom as something larger than purely a license that kinds in on redistribution. This is the new frontier for those who are thinking about furthering the goals of the free software and open source movements. Our old tools are inadequate, and I’m not sure that the needed replacements work, or even exist.

A successor for Insomnia and Postman. It catches API requests for now.

La certification peut coûter quelques millions, ce qui est un freins pour le développement de logiciel open-source.

Medical Device Coordination Framework est un outil de coordination des appareils médicaux. L'objectif est de développer une plateforme matérielle open source.

Public sector will develop OSS software and should use them