Post

Surprised to see a few posts like this lately. I've been strongly anti-license-switch for as long as this stuff has been going on, but perhaps not loud enough. There is no future in which this will happen. The #serilog project doesn't even accept donations! It's by the community, for the community.

iBRAR 🍉@ibrar-dev.bsky.social

What would break the dotnet csharp world right now, would be if #serilog followed suit and did the same thing. May companies would be forced to engineer away to alternatives or pay for license. As logging is not a straight forward thing to replace.

0 reposts2 likes

What I love best about open source is that it's communal and cooperative. I love getting paid, too, and there's great software out there under a whole range of commercial models, but we'll undermine trust in OSS if we accept license switches as the norm.

I think it makes sense to acknowledge that your position here is different than many OSS authors, in that Serilog is a natural funnel to Seq, a closed-source commercial offering (that I love!). I think that's a really strong model but not necessarily available to every OSS author.

The option to build a complementary product or service isn't viable for everyone, but for high-use libraries, it's within reach a lot of the time. When you build one of these things, you end up a bit of a domain expert, and have a high chance of seeing the gaps and opportunities others won't...

I also think the OSS model of "consumers will become contributors" didn't pan out in most cases, leading to maintainer burnout without a viable comment model and entitled consumers. And now, OSS consumers have to be ready to adapt to license changes when they happen.

Consumers can 1) adapt to license changes and pay if necessary 2) pin the version they're using at the last known free-licensed version 3) replace the dependency. But an OSS library isn't a promise or free labor forever, and many treat it that way.