FUSE for macOS will no longer maintained
Fuse is a file system for Mac OS developed by an open source software.
FUSE package for MacOS provides a number of API, used to OS X 10.9 to macOS 10.13 file system development. It is the successor to MacFUSE, MacFUSE has become the basis for many products, but is no longer maintained. You can use the API provides developers many types of file system, the contents of which can come from a local disk, the entire network, memory, or any other source. One of these API is derived from the Linux FUSE API superset. As the FUSE file system is conventional applications (instead of kernel extension), therefore, the development of standard applications, like macOS, you have the same flexibility and choice in programming tools, debuggers, and libraries.
Recently, HackerNews post a lively discussion of this matter.
He said the original author since 2012 has been the sole defenders of the project, has never been compensated. He said the software will always be free, but I hope to benefit from this project to support commercial companies can continue to develop the project.
He will never ask users of financial support (donations or other forms of appreciation), Fuse will always be free.
However, he asked that those sales are based on Fuse in the Fuse product or its application bundled with the company, if they can afford it, then invest some of the profits to continue to develop on OS Mac Fuse . He does not think it's unreasonable. Consequently, he is exercising the same rights BSD, all the other companies are accepted and commercialization of his work, did not provide any funds for the repair or sustainable development.
Given Another option would be to abandon the project, the only way is, if others took over its maintenance / development, it will continue to develop and is an open source software project, anyone can create and maintain a Fork and freedom to do it.
But following a personal reply said, is the original author did not receive any compensation, their company has paid to his cost.
Since 2012 he has been the sole defenders of the project, I have never been compensated against. I work for a company that paid Fuse brand he built for MacOS, for several years been doing. He really gives us a new Build, but sometimes hard to get him to respond to our needs and even sent his special patch. I do not believe him than his business license as a Fuse of maintenance personnel is much better. Therefore, we are quite satisfied with his work, to continue to support the new version of MacOS, these versions is very difficult in these days (code signing and notarization requirements continue to become more and more onerous, to protect the integrity of the system has remained in debugging mode, etc. on), but if we are not limited to, a person working on the project, which would be nice. I really hope he keeps an open source project, and continue to provide a customized basis for the company on a contract basis. Since the signing of the construction and kernel extensions difficulty on all versions of all supported MACOS, has only available source, but will remain a binary file in exclusive licenses may be enough for most companies are licensed to provide customized as we like Construction.
Above we can see the original authors have received fees paid by other commercial companies, but for the individual needs and customized version and patch or charged. This is the author's appeal really is no conflict, he wants is a commercial company for the development of the project and to make financial support, not just individually customized version for their own needs.
There are friends, said: Apple is the best result this module is incorporated into the Mac OS kernel. After all, FUSE is a de facto standard, and apparently widely useful piece of code. Open source project by a maintenance person is often very difficult, and financial difficulties, as well as lack of staff in addition. If after you received financial support, but suddenly one day you are no longer interested, it will be left is a pile of "mess." The increase in the core development / maintenance personnel will help alleviate this situation.
There are users replied: I do not mind having a "donate" button on the project, I would like for it every 5-10 months to donate $ express my support.
There are people looking for this type of project.
So this is an area I'm very interested. I have conducted extensive research, and dozens of medium to large open source software maintenance personnel spoke, and to submit a project to postpone consideration. The only thing I can conclude that each method from OpenHoldings to PayPal link does not work. Donation does not work. You have to give people something of value, even in nominal terms, to really get the interests of enterprises, and promote the return on investment (ROI), so that it may continue to spend so much time on these projects. Many people scoffed, waving their rights of free time to talk about other people's (or, if those who choose to use other ways of spending free time, the invisible hand can make things run smoothly, while ignoring this usually just means others will be exhausted). The only sustainable way to build open source software is to allow enterprises to its cost. This is why we find ourselves in the position of these conversations: the important thing is not the end-user free rider, but commercial. (I do not think Redis license is the right approach, FWIW, I think there are better and have a very happy people with similar interests in this area off-line chat;... In my e-mail profile)
There has set up a special team to take over the site for open source projects. https://www.codeshelter.co/