3 ms·
If you have a counterpoint I urge you to make it.
by FlamingMoe 2y ago
If you have a counterpoint I urge you to make it.
- simonw 2y agoNear the start of the article: "That license change has helped us build a sustainable open source project with 8 core team members and several paid external contributors at the time of writing. We don’t have any investors, so all this is solely funded by the fees our 12,000+ subscribers pay us." Then later on while talking about the self-hosting option: "We make $300 per month from donations from our self-hosted users. It would take us more than ten years of donations to pay one month of salary for our small team." That's only misleading if you skim the article. They clearly differentiate between the 12,000 paying subscribers who fund the operation compared to the $300 in donations from self-hosters.
- maccard 2y agoThanks - this is exactly it.
- tedivm 2y agoI'm a paying customer. I paid for it because of the open source license. The thing that is misleading is pretending that being open source only makes them $300/month while ignoring the number of customers who chose them because they are open source.
- maccard 2y ago> The thing that is misleading is pretending that being open source only makes them $300/month while ignoring the number of customers who chose them because they are open source. No, that one line without the entire preceeding part of the blog post makes it sound like that. However when the blog post opens with > That license change has helped us build a sustainable open source project with 8 core team members and several paid external contributors at the time of writing. It's abundantly clear that they attribute that success to their open core model.