On 2 November 2016 at 07:21, Jeff Rouse <jeffr@activestate.com> wrote:
Your site says: "Why take risks with open source Lua and community
support".
I don't see any risks in open source Lua. What do you have in mind?
The risks for an enterprise is that they need to make sure of issues
like getting timely support, a contractual obligation for service,
assurances and timely security fixes. In many cases they need
the backing of a commercial entity to feel comfortable and in
some cases this is a legal or compliance requirement. To
them it takes risk away. So its important for us to speak to
that. It in no way reflects on how the community supports
the language.
Here's some feedback:
- most of the language in the site feels confrontational; offering
your distribution (and support) as an alternative, not a complement to
the community.
- among your solutions, you list "ActiveLua Community Edition",
"ActiveLua Business Edition", "ActiveLua Enterprise Edition". When I
see these "editions" list, I always have to wonder what each of these
take away from the original and feel that the whole design is geared
to make the most money. Nothing bad in having solid business model,
of course; but that means that if I choose to do any kind of
interaction with such a company, I have to be on the defensive side.
It's much more welcoming when you design your cost levels in terms of
support and not product.
- "ActiveLua™" is it ok to include the Lua name within your new
trademaked name? Not a lawyer (and trademark law is even more
confusing than patents and copyrights) but again, it feels like trying
to stomp on the community.
Obviously, you already have experience in making money with Open
Source development communities. I honestly hope all these
observations prove to be just a bad first impression and soon find you
a valuable member of the Lua community.
