Post

What about maintainers that wish to sustain themselves with their OSS work? Or who wish they had more resources to build a better thing?

Then they should figure out a business model around it. I honestly think the idea of maintainers sustaining themselves off of OSS is inherently flawed. It can work for a few but that is the exception. So, the question becomes “why open source at all” the answer is because you get value out of it.

This is not to say we shouldn't explore ways to crowd source bug fixing, support, etc... but that is all bonus and not a requirement to be "sustainable".

@shanesveller.bsky.social

That said, based on my quick read of the information out there on the Cyber Resilience Act, I think it might end up being decent. It clearly places the onus on the companies building products with OSS.

Shane Sveller

OSS doesn't seem very sustainable for devs who don't do it on the side from their generous day job, or AS their day job. It's certainly nowhere near as lucrative as an average full-time SWE position for most maintainers - it's mostly synonymous with "volunteer" for people with less exceptional luck.

@shanesveller.bsky.social

You are assuming that “sustainable” means “others manage bug fixes and releases for me for free”. I’m saying, OSS authors should just… not. Let users fork if they want. Unless they understand themselves why they are putting in the work.

Shane Sveller

The only assumption I'm consciously making was to expand the word sustainable to mean "sustainable to work on while needing regular food and housing". Not whether the code or project would experience longevity. Since if maintainers can't make ends meet, it's probably doomed in the long term.

Devs should make ends meet either by having an employer or a business model. If a dev wants to work on something for fun on the side, and push it out, that also is fine. They can immediately abandon it. If the code is useful to someone, that someone can fork / take over maintenance.

Jeremy Lewi

@jeremy.lewi.us

I think it would be much better if OSS devs had a way to capture more of the value they created. I think there are two big buckets 1) devs working for free or 2) you work for a corporation with a vested interest /agenda in the projeft

Most oss devs capture value by using other oss work. Not by getting paid to maintain it. If the default answer from OSS authors was “lol no pay me” businesses can then either fork and pay employees to do the work (way more) or find ways to pay less by pooling resources