5 ms·

Not what I could call 'open source'. Basic features (e.g. 'XML and JSON export') require a subscription to the 'premium' or 'enterprise' plans, even when self-

Not what I could call 'open source'. Basic features (e.g. 'XML and JSON export') require a subscription to the 'premium' or 'enterprise' plans, even when self-hosting.

jasfi 4y ago
It looks like you can export to, at minimum, CSV with the self-hosted edition: https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/nqj9ni/just_released_baserow_13_with_exporting_to_csv/ https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/nqj9ni/just_rel... Also the free plan isn't the same as the Open Source edition, which doesn't have data limits.
bram2w 4y ago
Founder of Baserow here. Exporting to XML and JSON are the first features that we're going to move into the free plan of Baserow as soon as we have new premium features to replace them with.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- jasfi 4y ago
  Baserow looks really good! Thanks for making it!
- asciiresort 4y ago
  Right, so it’s open core, not open source
  - webdog 4y ago
    GitLab, as an example, has been clear about having an "open core" business model[1] I appreciate that level of transparency. It gives me confidence that they understand their market and customers. Naming matters. If a company can't or won't use the agreed-upon-by-the-software-development-community terminology on how the project is operated, it's souring to me. I also wonder if they (the company) understand what Open Source "is," specifically the responsibility that inherently comes with having an Open Source development/product model. In that circumstance, it feels like they have come to understand Open Source in the same vein that society once understood phrenology[2]. [1] https://about.gitlab.com/company/stewardship/ https://about.gitlab.com/company/stewardship/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology
- chii 4y ago
  - nisegami 4y ago
    But don't claim to be something you're not. Perhaps the "open-core" label might be most appropriate here?
  - solarkraft 4y ago
    It's not okay to pretend your product is open while it's not.
- prepend 4y ago
  I want your company to be successful as airtable needs competition. The TechCrunch article classified you as full open source but this doesn’t seem accurate. It’s ok to be proprietary and charge money for licenses. The confusion is when the label “open source” is used for non open source software.
grepfru_it 4y ago
Have a looksie at BudiBase[0], another open source low-code platform. I believe SSO is still functional in the open source version, but roles do not exist. [0] https://budibase.com/ https://budibase.com/
- foxbee 4y ago
  For reference, here is the github link for Budibase: https://github.com/Budibase/budibase https://github.com/Budibase/budibase
ren_engineer 4y ago
I'm getting really tired of the companies using "open source version of X" as pure marketing when all they release is a gimped version that is basically unusable while shilling their SaaS version that has full features I've seen an explosion of these types of companies cloning already popular tools and using open source as their primary differentiator

Not what I could call 'open source'. Basic features (e.g. 'XML and JSON export') require a subscription to the 'premium' or 'enterprise' plans, even when self-hosting.

jasfi 4y ago

It looks like you can export to, at minimum, CSV with the self-hosted edition: https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/nqj9ni/just_released_baserow_13_with_exporting_to_csv/ https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/nqj9ni/just_rel... Also the free plan isn't the same as the Open Source edition, which doesn't have data limits.

bram2w 4y ago

Founder of Baserow here. Exporting to XML and JSON are the first features that we're going to move into the free plan of Baserow as soon as we have new premium features to replace them with.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jasfi 4y ago
Baserow looks really good! Thanks for making it!
asciiresort 4y ago
Right, so it’s open core, not open source
- webdog 4y ago
  GitLab, as an example, has been clear about having an "open core" business model[1] I appreciate that level of transparency. It gives me confidence that they understand their market and customers. Naming matters. If a company can't or won't use the agreed-upon-by-the-software-development-community terminology on how the project is operated, it's souring to me. I also wonder if they (the company) understand what Open Source "is," specifically the responsibility that inherently comes with having an Open Source development/product model. In that circumstance, it feels like they have come to understand Open Source in the same vein that society once understood phrenology[2]. [1] https://about.gitlab.com/company/stewardship/ https://about.gitlab.com/company/stewardship/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology
chii 4y ago
- nisegami 4y ago
  But don't claim to be something you're not. Perhaps the "open-core" label might be most appropriate here?
- solarkraft 4y ago
  It's not okay to pretend your product is open while it's not.
prepend 4y ago
I want your company to be successful as airtable needs competition. The TechCrunch article classified you as full open source but this doesn’t seem accurate. It’s ok to be proprietary and charge money for licenses. The confusion is when the label “open source” is used for non open source software.

grepfru_it 4y ago

Have a looksie at BudiBase[0], another open source low-code platform. I believe SSO is still functional in the open source version, but roles do not exist. [0] https://budibase.com/ https://budibase.com/

foxbee 4y ago
For reference, here is the github link for Budibase: https://github.com/Budibase/budibase https://github.com/Budibase/budibase

ren_engineer 4y ago

I'm getting really tired of the companies using "open source version of X" as pure marketing when all they release is a gimped version that is basically unusable while shilling their SaaS version that has full features I've seen an explosion of these types of companies cloning already popular tools and using open source as their primary differentiator