On Thu, 10 Nov 2011, Jeremy Ruston wrote:
The core of Mile's observation applies to both of us, though: we're trying to secure a long term model for supporting ourselves while we work on the software. I guess your point is that if either of us failed to establish a viable model, then it shouldn't necessarily imply the death of the software.
Not only should it not imply the death of the software, I think if it even worries people about the death of the software, then there is something very unhealthy happening in the community. But beyond that I think it is important to keep in mind that though I'm currently employed as a creator of a tiddly-related code I do not believe that what I'm paid for is the code itself. The code is free, it is merely an expression of my expertise. It is the expertise and associated experience which is being paid for. When you, Eric, I or anyone else is paid to improve tiddly* it is because the payer needs it in either a faster or more direct way than the community can provide OR they are doing what they feel is just in the face of value they are getting from the community. Organizations like BT, in general, can use money more easily than they can perform the committed community participation that individuals provide in the form of use, bug reporting, documentation, community assistance and plain ol' writing code. In the end, whatever the currency, the value obtained is membership and participation. -- Chris Dent http://burningchrome.com/ [...] -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
