As far as I've seen it's actually the opposite. Gitea has been growing in support and popularity, and as such, it needed to put some legal structure in place to deal with increased income and distribution of funds so that it's not abused.
That is, I BELIEVE, the intention with the announcement and structural changes. As a relatively significant commercial backer of both bounties and Open Collective, I was as surprised as everyone to see the announcement. If my assumptions are correct, I completely agree with the decision. I want developers who contribute to gitea to benefit from the software they are building and think there is enormous potential for everyone to share in the upside.
It's an exciting, new junction for the project. I think we are a little bit in the dark at the moment and I'm pushing for better communication.
> Gitea has been growing in support and popularity, and as such, it needed to put some legal structure in place to deal with increased income and distribution of funds so that it's not abused.
None of that requires turning it from an open-source into an open-core project.
That is, I BELIEVE, the intention with the announcement and structural changes. As a relatively significant commercial backer of both bounties and Open Collective, I was as surprised as everyone to see the announcement. If my assumptions are correct, I completely agree with the decision. I want developers who contribute to gitea to benefit from the software they are building and think there is enormous potential for everyone to share in the upside.
It's an exciting, new junction for the project. I think we are a little bit in the dark at the moment and I'm pushing for better communication.