Re: (OT) Sponsoring open source

How about custom-coding their sponsored features into a proprietary module just for them, then taking some time to "make it right" before incorporating those features into the open source version? Of course, the contract would need to be clear that you will eventually release their sponsored code into the free version, but what they're paying for is to get it when they want it, and possibly with a custom I/O that they specify.

So basically, you'll have one official open source module, and a whole bunch of proprietary variants for which you are paid to maintain.

---
It's all fine and dandy until someone has to look at the code.

Comment on Re: (OT) Sponsoring open source

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: (OT) Sponsoring open source by creamygoodness (Curate) on Jun 13, 2006 at 20:03 UTC
Thanks, kwaping. The advantage of this approach is that it's closer to traditional contracting, which is probably more comfortable for both parties. You'd have to apply it on a case-by-case basis though. Some of the work people are asking me to do can only happen via making some fundamental changes to the library. For stuff like that, the preliminary work might turn out to be hackwork that might not survive updates. -- Marvin Humphrey Rectangular Research ― http://www.rectangular.com	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: (OT) Sponsoring open source
by creamygoodness (Curate) on Jun 13, 2006 at 20:03 UTC

Thanks, kwaping. The advantage of this approach is that it's closer to traditional contracting, which is probably more comfortable for both parties. You'd have to apply it on a case-by-case basis though. Some of the work people are asking me to do can only happen via making some fundamental changes to the library. For stuff like that, the preliminary work might turn out to be hackwork that might not survive updates.

--
Marvin Humphrey
Rectangular Research ― http://www.rectangular.com

[reply]