[eeZah7Ux]

No thanks. This approach violates the spirit of FLOSS by encouraging developers to focus on popularity rather than quality in order to make bank.

It takes away the collective aspect and replaces it with extreme individualism. There's already a software model for that: closed source.

Also, you posted the same URL many times. Please do not spam HN.

[rndhouse]

Sponsorship and donations are the popularity driven funding mechanisms. I want to fund the unpopular long tail of software maintainers (like the log4j guys who were not well known before the incident).

I want to fund maintainers based on whether the software is *used* commercially or not. Not on whether it's popular or not.

OpenFare doesn't lead to extreme individualism. It aims to fund collaborative software development. The OpenFare scheme is flexible enough to reflect how the collective wants to manage funding.

The OpenFare is *equivalent* to the MIT License in non-commercial settings. It isn't even close to a closed source license.