Short answer: Not much...
I've read a lot of speculation that the new SpringSource maintenance policy means that Spring will no longer be open-source and that SpringSource is playing a big game of bait-n-switch with us. But before you run out in the streets and light the skies with flaming effigies of Rod Johnson, let's examine what the change really means.
First, I've seen several people refer to this as a change in Spring's licensing. That's simply not true. Spring will continue to be available under the same licenses as before (Apache License 2.0 for most of the Spring portfolio and GPL for SpringSource dm Server). This change only refers to the maintenance policy, and specifically to binary builds.
My understanding of the new policy (confirmed with SpringSource) is that it means no more binary downloads of maintenance releases of Spring projects after 3 months following a major release, unless you're a SpringSource Enterprise customer. That's it.
Spring has been, still is, and shall continue to be open-source--with emphasis on "source". The license did not change. SpringSource will continue to resolve bugs and place those fixes in the public source code repositories. And, as a member of open-source society, you'll still be able to check that code out and build it yourself.
SpringSource, however, will no longer be obligated to provide binary builds or any other form of support after 3 months following the major release that those changes were applied to. Come to think of it, I'm not sure that they ever really were obligated to do so--but they did so anyway because they're nice folks and that's what seems to be expected of them.
If you're the kind of developer who uses Spring with an open-source mindset, then you shouldn't have any qualms about checking out the source code and building it yourself. Yeah, I agree that it won't be as convenient as before--but you'll still be able to freely use the latest and greatest that Spring has to offer. If, however, building Spring for yourself brings up questions about support and who's head will be on the line for fixes, or if you simply do not have the technical savvy to do so, then I suggest that you stop freeloading off of SpringSource's good graces and buy an enterprise support license.
As an open-source project, Spring does not entitle you to any form of free support. Be thankful that you've had it up until now--many open-source projects offer no support and rarely produce binary releases. As a business, SpringSource is entitled to compensation for their work--and yet they will still be making their work available for free everytime that they do a major release and from SVN/CVS for all times in between.
The point that everyone seems to be missing is that this move is ultimately beneficial to everyone who uses Spring--both those who pay and those who do not. By placing a finite limit on how far back any maintenance will apply, SpringSource resources are able to focus more attention on the future of Spring, making it better than before.
Lest anyone misrepresent my stake in this game, let it be clear that I am not employed by SpringSource and am not simply towing the company line. And while it is true that I have made some money by writing about Spring, the royalties from my books do not represent a significant percentage of my income. I defend Spring and SpringSource in this matter because I find their work to be of the highest quality and their professionalism to be unparalleled. And because I have read too much misinformation and FUD to remain silent.
