Re: ActiveState seeking Lua community feedback

[Jeff Rouse <jeffr@...>]

Hi Peter,

I understand your concern here, but this is an issue across ALL of open source. We would not have been in business for almost twenty years if enterprises didn't want someone to handle the risks (and in some cases the complexities depending on the language how enterprise friendly it is) that they do not want to own. Licenses, IP, third party modules, backporting security fixes, someone to call who has their backs for mission critical software they just built on top of Lua, migrating between versions, custom builds for special use cases, you get the idea.

In all cases they can just use the community code themselves and maintain it into the future, it is their choice. We are speaking to the managers (and their organizations) who don't want that risk, but they want their teams to build the best software with the best tools such as Lua, and with our help they can.

Cheers,

-JR

On 2016-11-03 10:02 AM, Peter Hickman wrote:

There is also the outcome that the manager see it and goes "I thought so, this open software has - complexity of open source licensing - big problems that require us to pay a 3rd party to mitigate. But who are this ActiveState anyway, never heard of them before. Probably just some scammers trying to rip us off. Besides I will have to get this past legal to make sure we are covered for the problems that open source licensing has and make sure that this 2bit operation called ActiveState wont disappear when the problems arise"

Gee ActiveState, thanks for helping out.

​