4 ms·

A few comments that I hope may help bring more clarity for your intended audience: * Your website looks slick and kinda well designed (though there seems to be

A few comments that I hope may help bring more clarity for your intended audience: * Your website looks slick and kinda well designed (though there seems to be too much information moving around). * The documentation starts with getting the user to sign up for the hosted version (SaaS). * There is no pricing information or FAQ about pricing and business model. * Though the code seems to be on GitHub and the license there is stated as AGPL, there are no prominent links to anything about self-hosting either on GitHub or on your main site. So I’m not sure why this is AGPL licensed but also talks the user into signing up to the hosted version in the docs. I think the self-hosting documentation will help bring more people to try it within their own environment without worrying as much about privacy and security.

arek_nawo 3y ago
Like I've said in the original post, the decision to open-source was made only a while back, after the core was developed as primarily a closed-source service. I decided it'd be very hard to compete with a closed-source CMS, let alone one targeted at DEV, so I decided to go with it - to build community and move the idea forward in general. Still, actually adjusting it to be easily self-hostable will take time, as I wrote here: https://docs.vrite.io/self-hosting https://docs.vrite.io/self-hosting The intention isn't to "talk users into" the hosted version, but just build interest, for which the hosted version serves best at the moment. Other points r.e. landing page are valid and I'm generally aware that I should focus more on content than design. Easier said than done though :)