4 ms·

This seems to be an increasingly popular model: Make an open source project on the one hand and selling a hosted, managed version of the open source product on

This seems to be an increasingly popular model: Make an open source project on the one hand and selling a hosted, managed version of the open source product on the other.

Bombthecat 4y ago
Well, it makes sense, you can outsource bug fixing and reporting for free. You can test and use the software for free Companies can outsource the responsibility of hosting.
- ariehkovler 4y ago
  > Well, it makes sense, you can outsource bug fixing and reporting for free. In the long term, maybe. In the short to medium term, most of the development ends up being done by the company who created the project. I guess for simple stuff like typo bugs, people will submit PRs, and maybe organisations with weird use-cases will merge their integrations etc into the project, though.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
candiddevmike 4y ago
I don't think the model has existed long enough, especially through hard times, to make a judgement on if it's effective or not.
- ariehkovler 4y ago
  Yeah, I tend to agree. I guess we'll see which companies can make it work and what happens to the projects if they don't.
asciimike 4y ago
Open Core (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-core_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-core_model) has existed for a while and has definitely proven itself to be viable, albeit for a limited number of folks. IMO the key to doing it right is ensuring that your hosted solution actually provides value: either because its difficult to operate at scale, there are certain regulatory/compliance requirements that need to be met, because certain features are restricted to a hosted product or under an enterprise license, etc. I've seen a decent number of people create a hosted version of their product, slap SAML/SSO behind an "enterprise" plan, and wonder why nobody their successful OSS product doesn't translate to meaningful hosted revenue.

This seems to be an increasingly popular model: Make an open source project on the one hand and selling a hosted, managed version of the open source product on the other.

Bombthecat 4y ago

Well, it makes sense, you can outsource bug fixing and reporting for free. You can test and use the software for free Companies can outsource the responsibility of hosting.

ariehkovler 4y ago
> Well, it makes sense, you can outsource bug fixing and reporting for free. In the long term, maybe. In the short to medium term, most of the development ends up being done by the company who created the project. I guess for simple stuff like typo bugs, people will submit PRs, and maybe organisations with weird use-cases will merge their integrations etc into the project, though.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

candiddevmike 4y ago

I don't think the model has existed long enough, especially through hard times, to make a judgement on if it's effective or not.

ariehkovler 4y ago
Yeah, I tend to agree. I guess we'll see which companies can make it work and what happens to the projects if they don't.

asciimike 4y ago

Open Core (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-core_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-core_model) has existed for a while and has definitely proven itself to be viable, albeit for a limited number of folks. IMO the key to doing it right is ensuring that your hosted solution actually provides value: either because its difficult to operate at scale, there are certain regulatory/compliance requirements that need to be met, because certain features are restricted to a hosted product or under an enterprise license, etc. I've seen a decent number of people create a hosted version of their product, slap SAML/SSO behind an "enterprise" plan, and wonder why nobody their successful OSS product doesn't translate to meaningful hosted revenue.