Benefits of Open Source Coding

[Andy]

I have written a Plugin for Wordpress which is based on "GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, June 1991"

In a nut shell, this means that all code that makes use of this software has to be free of charge and open source.

The writers of Wordpress are employees of a sponsor company that charges enterprises for tech support and stuff, so they make a living on the back of Wordpress. So my plan is to do the same thing by my plugin being a part of a larger whole. The first plugin makes a lot of sense to run under Wordpress since I am tracking visits to sites that are powered by Wordpress.

The other code only uses data that is stored in the database of the site so it does not need to use any Wordpress functions.

So I do see a benefit in giving away code, but at the same time you have to think creatively about how you can benefit from the work you put in to providing this free code and be 2 steps ahead of anyone thinking about building on top of your code base.

Another benefit I see is that popular plugins generate a lot of links to the developer's site so it can give their web site a high search engine ranking. On the other hand I do see them complaining about the huge number of hours they put into developing their script and begging people to donate etc.

[SensoVision]

Andy, I think you underestimate benefits of Open Source and see it from monetary side which would not necessarily comes the way you've planned.

Just take look to history of some famous OSS project, I never read story about few folks gathered together to make product popular and make money of it. All of them were started to fulfill needs of creator and fill the niche which was lucking particular product. I'm sure that's the key lies in making product which is really in demand, and that you make it not for profit(simply because it may take very long time before it start bring any revenue if at all, so writing open source code having money as motivation would likely not work, sorry).

So I do see a benefit in giving away code, but at the same time you have to think creatively about how you can benefit from the work you put in to providing this free code and be 2 steps ahead of anyone thinking about building on top of your code base.

Another benefit I see is that popular plugins generate a lot of links to the developer's site so it can give their web site a high search engine ranking. On the other hand I do see them complaining about the huge number of hours they put into developing their script and begging people to donate etc.

maybe programmers who write OSS code would disagree with me but I think that major benefits from open source coding are fact that you got community of free beta-testers and people who would track bugs and suggest you new features which you may not even think about yourself, but which surely be good addition for your product(I've make this conclusion by reporting bugs on maillists of programs I'm using and reading feedback of other people).
Coding open source project is a good way for polishing your programming skills and getting new knowledge.

Also my belief is that some programmers offer their works for free to get publicity and make sure that they really doing well in coding and that they could do even better, it's like a sort of sport.

I think that sponsoring of project is good thing, and sometimes it's become imminent at some stage of project development, when without sponsors it may just die out because lack of time, financial problems or/and motivation. But thinking about monetary potential before project become potential is IMHO wrong way and wouldn't likely lead to success of the program.

I have to admit that still not released any of my scripts since keep on rewriting it's code all the time, to make it more efficient and mature in my eyes.
Andy, don't take things said here personal, I know you've skills and talent to make money almost of everything.
You proved me wrong in the past few times in monetary questions, so I wouldn't mind if you do it this time too Maybe I just didn't look at particular projects which was started for income purposes from beginning, or I'm too naive.
Anyway good luck with your plugin, I'd be happy if it become sponsored product!

[Andy]

You have some good points. My main concern in common with other developers is that we don't want to easily lose our work to a community.

I don't like the idea of people building on my code to keep improving it since it works and I like to keep it simple and not bloat out. Of course, if I made a mistake that needs to be fixed such as a security problem, then it is nice that somebody contributes a solution to that and gets credit. Or maybe there is a more efficient way to do something that somebody suggests. This is the angle that I am coming from. I am not a team worker but a lone developer. Some people like to be part of a development team, I like to work alone as a control freak and perfectionist, so I don't want to work in subversion.

I have to admit that still not released any of my scripts since keep on rewriting it's code all the time, to make it more efficient and mature in my eyes.

It has been a few years now since you started and all your code seems to be closed source. So you don't embrace the spirit of open source development yourself! Why don't you want other programmers to improve your software and iron out the bugs much faster than you can do it yourself? It seems to me like you want to retain ownership of your code that you worked so hard to develop just like I do.

But unlike you, I actually freely published much of my code on blogs and forums and I also gave you code to combat spam attacks on this forum.

And you admitted before to not having read or understood the GPL license, if you read it, you would maybe realise that it is no good for individual developers like us.

[Andy]

I never read story about few folks gathered together to make product popular and make money of it.

LOL

How about movie companies, check the credits at the end of blockbuster movies, they are in it to make money.

Fortune 500 companies involve the whole workforce to feel part of a team to make money.

Top brands such as Nike, McDonalds etc. all involve their employees to gather together to make their product cool and popular.

Team work is usually the #1 consideration for these money-making companies.

[SensoVision]

You have some good points. My main concern in common with other developers is that we don't want to easily lose our work to a community.

None does, I guess, but as long as you remain active and keep your leading position this wouldn't happen.

I don't like the idea of people building on my code to keep improving it since it works and I like to keep it simple and not bloat out.

I'm not 100% sure but maybe GPL 2 isn't for you than, as if I remember well it leave place for derivations. Maybe more closed license would work better?

Some people like to be part of a development team, I like to work alone as a control freak and perfectionist, so I don't want to work in subversion.

I wasn't part of team long enough to say wherever I like it or not. But generally I'm like you, lone developer who wish to have everything under control But I wouldn't mind to work with team of people whom I could trust on some big project where everyone have own area of coding, e.g. someone would work on interface, some on internal code, and some on plugins. This way I think that work on project would be more effective than if everything is done by one person.

It has been a few years now since you started and all your code seems to be closed source. So you don't embrace the spirit of open source development yourself! Why don't you want other programmers to improve your software and iron out the bugs much faster than you can do it yourself? It seems to me like you want to retain ownership of your code that you worked so hard to develop just like I do.

You're wrong, Andy. Guess you're just better programmer and more open minded person than me and that's why you released your code already.
As for me there are several reason for me never releasing anything:
1. I'm pretty lazy person and it's pretty hard for me to effectively organize my time so I would have time not only to work on main projects and my family but also spend some time for work on my own programs.
2. I try to avoid extra commitments in my life, since when I don't have time for them, it really make me feel bad. And I'm sure that because lack of time code would be neglected and developing die out... And I feel guilty for giving false hope to people, you see my point?
3. My code is total mess... In beginning I was building following scripts: photo gallery, CMS and counter script and reciprocal link manager, submission form. All above was planned to be released under GPL. But counter and link manager become obsolete and none would use them, and in time when they was mature enough to be released there was so many of similar scripts that simply there is no reason for releasing another similar product.
Photo gallery never have finished admin panel which would be usable for person who wasn't familiar with it. I didn't have time to finish it right away but when got spare time again and look into the code I realized that it's not effective and start to re-write it.
Somewhere in the middle of developing I've start using more and more object oriented programming, so naturally I've tried to rewrite code using object style as well.
Also database layout have also changed since I've added and removed few features which I didn't worked for me, so if I would release it to public new versions of software wouldn't be compatible with old ones...
As for CMS it's die even faster, I decide that it's easier to develop custom solutions for people using parts of own code rather than having something like Joomla or Drupal(at least it's easier for me).

So none of my projects are actually functional right now, I'm just using different part of code when hired by people.

As for submission form, I don't think it would be useful to anyone, there are a lot of many different scripts with much better functionality, mine doesn't offer anything unique, it's pretty simple and all customization is manual.

4. there are more reasons/excuses if you like, but guess that what I've named more than enough.
The only way I contribute to community right now is using CVS version of software and reporting bugs to projects of programs I'm using.

But unlike you, I actually freely published much of my code on blogs and forums and I also gave you code to combat spam attacks on this forum.

Thank you, Andy, it's much appreciated!

LOL
How about movie companies, check the credits at the end of blockbuster movies, they are in it to make money.
Fortune 500 companies involve the whole workforce to feel part of a team to make money.
Top brands such as Nike, McDonalds etc. all involve their employees to gather together to make their product cool and popular.
Team work is usually the #1 consideration for these money-making companies.

Aren't we talked about open source software? I never heard that Nike or McDonalds released any code so does movie companies... it's quite different in my opinion.

[Andy]

Andy, I think you underestimate benefits of Open Source and see it from monetary side which would not necessarily comes the way you've planned.

It seems like you are wishing me bad luck when I try and base my everyday living on coding? I also recommended coding to my son who is coding games. We cannot survive if nobody buys the results of our work since we are not employees of corporations.

If I paint a wall, I get a happy customer that pays me say $10 but if I spend 4 hours writing some code that paints a picture of an uploaded image on the web I should not make any money?

[SensoVision]

It seems like you are wishing me bad luck when I try and base my everyday living on coding? I also recommended coding to my son who is coding games. We cannot survive if nobody buys the results of our work since we are not employees of corporations.

Andy, how did you come to this conclusion, did you read what I wrote above or not?
Have I told somewhere that would like that corporation wouldn't pay to small people? I've just tried to point that free open source projects to be successful should have other motivation in my opinion.
If it's main aim to make money, maybe it should be rather released as commercial product right away or offer paid support, and not wait for corporations to sponsor it.
It's just hat I don't think that relying on corporations in developing product is good idea.

If I paint a wall, I get a happy customer that pays me say $10 but if I spend 4 hours writing some code that paints a picture of an uploaded image on the web I should not make any money?

depends why you wrote this code...
I constantly give my brain force for free to other people and have no problem with this at all.

I'm sorry that you get it this way, I would be really happy if more people able to earn money writing OSS code. And surely I be glad if you succeed, I'm serious. And it's really sad that you suspect me in wishing you bad luck...

[donecweb]

If I paint a wall, I get a happy customer that pays me say $10 but if I spend 4 hours writing some code that paints a picture of an uploaded image on the web I should not make any money?

Yes you should be paid if you want money for your code but why should you keep getting money every time someone uses the code since once it is used and you have been paid for that use?

[Andy]

why should you keep getting money every time someone uses the code since once it is used and you have been paid for that use?

I don't know? I never said you should.

The plugin I wrote is going to be free of charge but not necessarily GPL. I don't remember saying anywhere that I was going to ask for money for it.

I wasted way too much time on this thread...

[donecweb]

I wasn't really talking about you but the idea of people wanting to get paid many many times for the same work.

[Andy]

I wasn't really talking about you but the idea of people wanting to get paid many many times for the same work.

You mean like royalty payments and licensing fees?

[Andy]

Andy, how did you come to this conclusion, did you read what I wrote above or not?

Sorry Denis, I didn't read and analyse everything you wrote. I just responded to some things that triggered my sensitivities. You wrote far too much, I never expected so much work that I have to do after publishing a simple post about my pondering the pros and cons of releasing some of my code as open source.

On my blog I spent 2 weeks working on what I thought was a great way to build an email marketing list. So I offered this information and code for free to people. Well, it just seemed like a waste of time since I got flamed just because one person thought there were too many steps involved. Before I sold a similar thing to something like 7 people and nobody complained, in fact I got thanked for it.

So I do understand the reluctance of people publishing things for free, even posts on blogs and forums since you are opening up yourself to the 98% of negative thinking people that love to just bash people.

For example, YouTube videos, why bother producing these when you teach over 1000 people to do something for free and the only feedback you receive is by some weirdo sending you one word "death". I actually asked this guy what they meant and he said something about being up late and actually my video helped him.

There was a recent new blogger on the scene that purchased a blog and provided lot's of great free information about how he buys and sells websites for about 6 months. Well he was so surprised by the level of negativity that he received via email and quit teaching this and went back to working on his own business.

I guess I am starting to ramble here, so will cut...

[donecweb]

You mean like royalty payments and licensing fees?

yep.

[Andy]

  I don't think the Beetles or Rolling Stones would be happy with that.

I do think the developers of a product should be able to gain over and over as more people use their product if they so wish.

People will save time, gain pleasure, make money etc. by using this product. So the originator should get some kind of pay back I think for every person benefiting from their original work if they want to. This is where the licensing steps in, it is a way for the inventor to decide how they want to share their work. I don't think it should be a decision made by people that did not invent the thing.

If I stumbled across a cancer cure then I would make this freely available to anyone and open source so anyone can improve on it. But if I write code that helps Internet Marketers, then I want to always be referenced as the originator of the code and not allow others to create derivative works to sell as their own. Or they can sell it but have to pay me a royalty for each sale they make.

The open source software that I am familiar with benefits the originators by making them famous, allowing them to sell enterprise solutions, generates sales of books about how to use the code and creates a demand for services that use the code such as web hosting.

I am coming at this from an angle of somebody that supports open source but does not get paid as a salaried employee or a pensioner where it is possible to code purely as a hobby. I am thinking about how professionals in the open source community make a living from it.

Just some further thoughts on the subject.

[donecweb]

I don't think the Beetles or Rolling Stones would be happy with that.

I am very sure you are quite correct.

I do think the developers of a product should be able to gain over and over as more people use their product if they so wish.

With that idea then when a person that does not need to be painted again then the original painter should get some of the money or every time you sell a car then the dealer and the manufacture should get some of the money.

But if I write code that helps Internet Marketers, then I want to always be referenced as the originator of the code and not allow others to create derivative works to sell as their own. Or they can sell it but have to pay me a royalty for each sale they make.

I agree with that completely. Any time someone may use what you create to make money for themselves they should make it clear who it was that made it possible giving credit to those deserving of it. I also think if someone is going to make money from your efforts then they should be required to share the money with you.