This isn’t about people working for free.

Nobody sensible is upset when a true FOSS “working for free” person hangs up their boots and calls it quits.

The issue here is that these are commercial products that abuse the FOSS ideals to run a bait and switch.

They look like they are open source in their growth phase then they rug pull when people start to depend on their underlying technology.

The company still exists and still makes money, but they stopped supporting their open source variant to try and push more people to pay, or they changed licenses to be more restrictive.

It has happened over and over, just look at Progress Chef, MongoDB, ElasticSearch, Redis, Terraform, etc.

▲

skeledrew 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

In this particular case, it's the fault of the "abused" for even seeing themselves as such in the first place. Many times it's not even a "bait-and-switch", but reality hitting. But even if it was, just deal with it and move on.

	▲	ghywertelling 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Make hay while the sun shines. Be glad that the project happened.
	▲	imtringued 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		This is definitely the case because the accusations and supposed social contract seem extremely one-sided towards free riding. Nobody here is saying they should donate the last version of MinIO to the Apache software foundation under the Apache license. Nobody is arguing for a formalized "end of life" exit strategy for company oriented open source software or implying that such a strategy was promised and then betrayed. The demand is always "keep doing work for me for free".

▲

nubinetwork 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> bait and switch

Is it really though? They're replacing one product with another, and the replacement comes with a free version.