Add info about price and trial

[licaon-kter]

No description provided.

[tasn]

Thanks for the PR, I really appreciate the help and the thought!

After some consideration, I think it's better if it's not merged. There are a few reasons, but the main ones are:

1. The pricing is not that simple any more, there are now two plans to choose from. I know it still says $14 on the main landing page, but that may soon change too.
2. I've been thinking recently about updating the pricing, so this change may not be relevant very soon. It's thus better to just have the website is the single point of truth.

If I may ask, what made you create this PR? Were you confused by this? I'd love to hear more about your thoughts.

Thanks again!

[licaon-kter]

Could you add your voice here then: https://forum.f-droid.org/t/paid-features-in-opensource-apps/4099/

My point, I'd like to make the monetary requirement known to the user before they download the app.

[tasn]

I'm not registered there since the update to the new forum system, but I can try to reply soon.

Just a summary of my thoughts on the matter: I think this is already covered with the current fdroid anti-features system. You have apps, e.g. Telegram, that rely on non-free services and are already marked as such. EteSync on the other hand is fully open source, client and server. So I think scaring users away from the open source project just because we also offer paid hosting is misguided. Dare I even say, counter-productive. It's better for everyone if open source projects manage to find a way to sustain themselves, this should be encouraged, if anything.

Additionally, I just noticed the comment just about yours on that thread about Conversations. That's another great example and I completely agree with the person who wrote it.

In summary: fdroid is about floss, not about free beer. Telegram being free (but closed source) doesn't make it less of an anti-feature, and even if they had paid extras, it would still be the same level of anti-feature: non-free (as in libre).

Anyhow, regarding this ticket: I'm happy to change the wording to be more explicit about the EteSync service being paid.
Maybe something like:

In order to use this application you need to either have an account with EteSync (paid hosting), or run your own instance (free and open source). Check out https://www.etesync.com/ for more information.

Thoughts?

[licaon-kter]

I'm happy to change the wording to be more explicit about the EteSync service being paid.

Great

Just a summary of my thoughts on the matter:

This PR was not about foss vs. paid, just about information. ;)

[tasn]

Fixed.