5 ms·
Yes, sort of. Sidekiq, for instance. The core product is free (and perfectly great), but the Pro version brings a lot of money. https://github.com/mperham/sidek
by robinhood 8y ago
Yes, sort of. Sidekiq, for instance. The core product is free (and perfectly great), but the Pro version brings a lot of money. https://github.com/mperham/sidekiq https://github.com/mperham/sidekiq
- dpark 8y agoI’m not familiar with Sidekiq. Am I correct in assuming that the “pro” version includes functionality that is not open sourced? If so, this is an example of proprietary code supporting the author with open source providing the free foundation.
- mperham 8y agowaves https://www.indiehackers.com/businesses/sidekiq https://www.indiehackers.com/businesses/sidekiq
- dpark 8y agoSo a great example of how asking devs to pay for OSS is not very profitable. :) It’s essentially asking for donations.
- mperham 8y agoYeah, something like RedHat does make lots of money off pure OSS because they sell huge support agreements to large orgs. It's harder/impossible to get smaller businesses to pay for smaller things like tools without holding back functionality. It's all about incentives. If you are selling support, you are incented to give poor support and documentation to your free users. If you are selling functionality, you are incented to give good support to everyone with the understanding that they need to upgrade if they want that functionality. I think the open core model makes for a happier, healthier community in general. The line in the sand where the user needs to pay is very clear and no one is treated poorly.