Interesting, thanks for posting! I like how people start trying out new license models while still trying to keep their products as open as possible. Since thi

Interesting, thanks for posting! I like how people start trying out new license models while still trying to keep their products as open as possible. Since this is a desktop application, not a Saas, and you opted for a subscription model: would you mind sharing your thinking behind this? Traditionally desktop apps like this were sold on a 'version' basis (i.e. you get this major version as well as any minor updates for a one-time fee). I can understand how a subscription model is desirable, as it sorta provides a predictable income stream. But in your case, where you try to reduce the risk for customers by promising to release the code as GPL after a few years anyway, wouldn't the traditional model make more sense, where users would 'own' one version of your product (esp. since you don't provide an ongoing service like hosting, apart from updates)? As a customer, my costs would be more predictable with less risks, and you could always have a mixed model (like for example Jetbrains has with it's IDEs), where you could still charge 'per seat', and have a subscription-like model where people get cheaper mayor upgrades and maybe support if they pay annually. As I said, I can understand choosing a pure subscription based model. But, personally, I'd be more inclined to spend money on something like this (or recommend your product as a consultant) if I could outright buy the latest version, or at least have the option (at a higher price, of course). I'm not sure at all that this is a common sentiment, so I might very well be in the minority here. But I'd still be interested why you choose that model...