[TxMt] Re: Do I have to pay for the final TM 2 license key?

[Jason McC. Smith]

Actually, I said that *if* you had not contributed, *then* you, (or anyone
else IMO) would be a parasite.

You say you have contributed.  Awesome!  You're not a parasite!  Huzzah!
 Thank you for your contributions.  Please continue to do so.

Conditional logic was important to understanding that flow.  I thought it
was crystal clear, but apparently not.  Apologies for a lack of clarity in
a too-quickly typed response.

I'm not a fan of Android in the forms that it ends up in the hands of
consumers (and it is hardly a community effort), and think GIMP is horridly
unusable.  Chrome is a nice basic browser, in a field of free browsers,
open *and* closed source.  I can continue down the list of the majority of
open source software, and pick them apart as bad examples of coding,
design, or both, but I really thought calling out Open Office was
sufficient as a poster child example.  (Don't get me started on the mess
that is Eclipse...)

I am absolutely baffled at the resistance to paying for quality products,
is all.  If it is worth something to you, contribute in some way.  I don't
see how it can be otherwise, and have any expectation of the continuation
of quality products that are not artificially propped up by corporate
interests in an attempt to vacuously ride a wave of naive grassroots
sentiment.

There is a clear-cut method for contributing to TM2: a license fee.  One
that is, really, more than fair IMO, and I am happy to do so.  Also, as I
understand it, other options for code contributors, etc, are being
considered.  I find this to be more than acceptable.  You may not, and
that's your decision to use or not use the product based on that.
 Personally, I find an individual railing against an open source license
that requires certain things of them, such as a minor fee, to be of little
difference than a corporation railing against the GPL requiring them to
release modified code.  Both are ways of ensuring contribution back to the
product and the product's community.  Perhaps it's merely a matter of
perspective.

Ken: I agree, but I found it more than a little repugnant for kafi to
wander in and accuse Allan of wanting to " 'attract' developers, however,
keeping the revenue".  Next time I'll remember that Allan is a grown man
who can defend himself, generally with more class and style than I wield.

Apologies to all for my part in this bit of useless drahma.


On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:27 PM, kafi <kkaaffii at gmail.com> wrote:

> People here seems not be able to discuss without calling names.
>
> Smith, mind your language. Do not call names. You are calling me parasite,
> but you have no manners.
>
> Ive donated money and participated with code and time (forum) in several
> open source projects. Do not talk supposing stuff that you have no
> knowledge
> about.
>
> You just picked Open Office? What about Android, Chrome, GIMP? Not
> convenient for your argument?
>
> I have asked a simple question. Do I need to pay for the license of TM 2
> for
> non-commercial personal use?
>
> And, give me one example of a popular open source software, where I need to
> purchase license key for non-commercial personal use.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://textmate.1073791.n5.nabble.com/Do-I-have-to-pay-for-the-final-TM-2-license-key-tp26689p26705.html
> Sent from the textmate users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> textmate mailing list
> textmate at lists.macromates.com
> http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.macromates.com/textmate/attachments/20130718/4a839752/attachment.html>