we can argue about semantics but it's not really productive, imo.
He implies nothing, he states that sponsor definition covers the OP use case. Having more than one word to describe the same thing is not surprising.
You imply that your definition of sponsor exclude OP use case and there is mislabeling.
The interesting point is the revenue issue in open-source business. This guy solved it for him and present for all how he did it, with no lies and no hypocrisy.
That someone got hung up on a correct word usage shed an interesting light on where this disconnect between open source dev payment and money really lies.
He implies nothing, he states that sponsor definition covers the OP use case. Having more than one word to describe the same thing is not surprising.
You imply that your definition of sponsor exclude OP use case and there is mislabeling.
The interesting point is the revenue issue in open-source business. This guy solved it for him and present for all how he did it, with no lies and no hypocrisy.
That someone got hung up on a correct word usage shed an interesting light on where this disconnect between open source dev payment and money really lies.