Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 117 posts

Re: Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

#61

Post by daitangio »

I am planning too this. My general recommendation is a plugin-based system. A lot of business just offer the same product as a SaaS or with integration just installed (like HomeAssistant which offers SSL certs for Alexa, or HelathChecks.io which offers Whatsup/Teams integrations).

Most of the Cusommers didn't care self-hosting, if your SaaS price is decent.

I strongly do not recommend to have two copies of the codebase, because it increase the sync time (like bug fixing portings, for instance).

Sad to say, consider protecting you from AWS/GCP/etc reselling as a service

Re: Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

#62

Post by madeofpalk »

jayd16 wrote: post #39
ezekg wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd handle it the same any other business would who had their intellectual property infringed upon.

How would you know?

If you don't know, then it probably doesn't affect you.

Re: Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

#63

Post by redwood »

ezekg wrote: post #15
scottcha wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couple of questions: 1. You link to fair.io but it seems there isn't a latest license there only a legacy version. Do you know what the current status is on what seems like a pending version update? 2. Your project repro actually links to the elastic license. Is there some relation between the two? Do you prefer the fairsource license over the elastic license>

1. You can read more about the Fair Source initiative here: https://twitter.com/chadwhitacre_/status/1790101820364267902 (also [0] and [1] for previous discussions). It's not official yet, but it's an attempt to define a new term for Open Source vs Source Available. I figured I'd start using the term early and see what happens. 2. Yes, the ELv2 will be considered a Fair Source license, because it allows contributions…

What was your calculus on ELv2 vs SSPL? The latter feels a better fit for the continuation of copyleft--too close to the fears you mentioned around AGPL?

Re: Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

#64

Post by pentacent_hq »

I’m building an Open Source multi-tenant email newsletter tool [1] and the project is entirely AGPLv3 licensed. I have automatic builds from the `main` branch that I deploy to the SaaS version while public Docker images are available only for tagged releases.

There is currently no difference between the self-hosted and the SaaS version, but I am planning two things:

1) An env variable `IS_SELF_HOSTED` which, when set to `false`, toggles certain features like billing (currently enabled via a separate env variable and theoretically available to self-hosters) and includes hard-coded stuff like a footer with links to the official project website and our ToS.

2) Add a registration feature for self-hosters who make a donation. I haven’t fully planned out this feature, but if a self-hosted instance is registered by a paid supporter, it will most likely remove a call for becoming a supporter (that is yet to be added) or give them a supporter badge.

Choosing the AGPLv3 has been partially inspired by Plausible’s very successful model [2]. They’re also using a `SELFHOST` env variable to differentiate between their "Enterprise Edition" and the "Community Edition" [3].

[1] https://www.keila.io

[2] https://plausible.io/blog/open-source-licenses

[3] https://github.com/plausible/analytics/blob/baa99652f612f50b...

Re: Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

#65

Post by jonrosner »

Don't split your codebase. Just add some flags if it is self-hosted or not. Devs here will cry and tell you you can't do that and people can bypass it. Really don't listen to them. 99% of the people who purchase your SaaS instead of self-hosting do it because they don't want the hassle. The rest won't buy from you anyway. The biggest problem is getting SOMETHING out there. If you have success (which let's be honest most likely you won't), you'll have enough time building a better solution later. So keep it simple.

Re: Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

#66

Post by anonu »

pentacent_hq wrote: post #64

I’m building an Open Source multi-tenant email newsletter tool [1] and the project is entirely AGPLv3 licensed. I have automatic builds from the `main` branch that I deploy to the SaaS version while public Docker images are available only for tagged releases. There is currently no difference between the self-hosted and the SaaS version, but I am planning two things: 1) An env variable `IS_SELF_HOSTED` which, when set…

Afero, i feel, is a hindrance to adoption, especially in for profit companies where IP matters.

Re: Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

#67

Post by MoOmer »

anonu wrote: post #66
pentacent_hq wrote: post #64

I’m building an Open Source multi-tenant email newsletter tool [1] and the project is entirely AGPLv3 licensed. I have automatic builds from the `main` branch that I deploy to the SaaS version while public Docker images are available only for tagged releases. There is currently no difference between the self-hosted and the SaaS version, but I am planning two things: 1) An env variable `IS_SELF_HOSTED` which, when set…

Afero, i feel, is a hindrance to adoption, especially in for profit companies where IP matters.

That’s by design; those corporations can purchase an enterprise license - and this is commonly the route desired!

Re: Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

#68

Post by pentacent_hq »

anonu wrote: post #66
pentacent_hq wrote: post #64

I’m building an Open Source multi-tenant email newsletter tool [1] and the project is entirely AGPLv3 licensed. I have automatic builds from the `main` branch that I deploy to the SaaS version while public Docker images are available only for tagged releases. There is currently no difference between the self-hosted and the SaaS version, but I am planning two things: 1) An env variable `IS_SELF_HOSTED` which, when set…

Afero, i feel, is a hindrance to adoption, especially in for profit companies where IP matters.

I see the AGPL as a way to ensure user freedom and as a way to make sure those who profit from our work give back to the community.

If someone is so concerned about their so-called "software patents" to the extent that they don't want to deploy their own instance of the AGPL code, they are more than welcome to use our SaaS offer.

Re: Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

#69

Post by kunley »

SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #57

In a previous well funded startup with a FOSS component that I worked for I designed a set up like this: - 2 git repos, one public, one private - Custom tooling inspired by other existing tools out there like copybara to move commits in a unidirectional flow from the private repo to the public one The private repo had the contents of the OSS repo in a subfolder, and a unidirectional workflow where all commits flowed…

Thanks for honest words on pros and cons, the workflow indeed seems manageable but might lead to troubles for some projects.

Re: Ask HN: Founders who offer free/OS and paid SaaS, how do you manage your code?

#70

Post by justsomehnguy »

reaperman wrote: post #17
ezekg wrote: post #4

I have a single code base [0] for the self-hosted editions and for the SaaS. I split features up across two editions: community edition (CE) and enterprise edition (EE), and then also two modes: singleplayer and multiplayer (single- vs multi-tenant). The switching is done via environment variables, KEYGEN_EDITION and KEYGEN_MODE. The SaaS offering actually runs the EE edition in multiplayer mode, and is right now the…

Could an individual of ill-repute freely download the source containing the EE and edit it to turn off checks for KEYGEN_EDITION and KEYFEN_MODE? Obviously you have license protection against them redistributing the modified version but would anything practical prevent them from running it themselves?

> but would anything practical

But would be it practical to go for a such guy?

There are always... stupid people who use hacked software 'because the employer don't have money', but I guess someone with a skill enough to read and patch such code is fully aware how the things are working and wouldn't be doing such stupid deeds.

Post reply on HN