On Jan 10, 6:29 am, Jordan Kay <[email protected]> wrote: > Unfortunately > open source doesn't let developers make money from work, losing an > entire dimension of incentive
That couldn't be farther from the truth. In fact there're many popular examples of software where people charge for OSS or rather the packaging for it. There is software licensed under terms which prohibit commercial redistribution and others where the license requires making the source code and the modifications to make it compile into the commercial package public. QS is supposedly under the Apache license and here's what Wikipedia knows about this license: "The Apache License requires preservation of the copyright notice and disclaimer, but it is not a copyleft license — it allows use of the source code for the development of proprietary software as well as free and open source software." So go ahead...
