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

How to pay your rent with your open source project

plausible.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 171 posts

Re: How to pay your rent with your open source project

#21

Post by open-source-ux »

FallsApart wrote: post #18
open-source-ux wrote: post #15

There is another option, unpopular with some open source advocates, the source-only option. You simply sell your software product (with source code) for a price. That's it. Simple and uncomplicated. Your customers get the source of your app. They can modify the code to suit their needs. But unlike open source, they cannot re-distribute the app. Very few companies would object to this. Some popular and profitable proj…

That model falls apart from the start. If anyone is savvy enough to compile from source then why buy it? If the code is free, then, I don't see how they'd even bother to pay for it; it being the compiled version; of course. It the source is out they can't hardly enforce anything or much. People will just go to github and compile it for free.

"That model falls apart from the start"

Sure, there may be some individuals who will refuse to pay, but companies will not risk legal violations by not adhering to the licence conditions for the app.

In fact, the 'source-only' model is nothing new. Back in the late 1990s, developers used to sell UI and data components for Delphi with full source code. Even though code wasn't published to public code repositorities, there was nothing to stop individuals posting those components to the internet for others to grab without purchasing. Even so, developers were able to successfully sell their 'source-only' components to other developers and companies.

Re: How to pay your rent with your open source project

#22

Post by bregma »

WJW wrote: post #3

TL;DR: start a business that sells a (possibly premium) hosted version of the project, sells training/support for the project or try to extract sponsoring from your users. It's less a "pay your rent with your open source project" article (as the title suggests) than a "start a business that happens to produce open source software" article. Also anyone with one or two smallish libraries need not apply, this is about p…

Oh come on, if it was possible to run a business model like that it would have been done. You would see multi-billion-dollar-valuation publicly traded companies like, say, Red Hat out there.

If it was sensible you'd see people like RMS and the Free Software Foundation advocating for it.

Re: How to pay your rent with your open source project

#23

Post by _frkl »

FallsApart wrote: post #18
open-source-ux wrote: post #15

There is another option, unpopular with some open source advocates, the source-only option. You simply sell your software product (with source code) for a price. That's it. Simple and uncomplicated. Your customers get the source of your app. They can modify the code to suit their needs. But unlike open source, they cannot re-distribute the app. Very few companies would object to this. Some popular and profitable proj…

That model falls apart from the start. If anyone is savvy enough to compile from source then why buy it? If the code is free, then, I don't see how they'd even bother to pay for it; it being the compiled version; of course. It the source is out they can't hardly enforce anything or much. People will just go to github and compile it for free.

That's why have licenses that forbid certain usages. Obviously those are not 'Open Source' as defined by OSI. If you use such software in ways forbidden by the license, you are liable. Companies would usually be very careful, and would not knowingly ignore the license terms.

Re: How to pay your rent with your open source project

#24

Post by _frkl »

krn wrote: post #17
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which in many ways looks deeply unapealing. The last thing I want to do is sell support or services. I'd much rather spend my time writing software that is easy to use and well documented.

Then, I guess, the only choice is Github Sponsors. And it doesn't seem to be a bad one[1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23613719

That, or using a very restrictive copy left license.

Re: How to pay your rent with your open source project

#25

Post by Hex08 »

dgellow wrote: post #2

What about charging for build and distribution? Krita does something like this for their Steam and Windows Store versions, that helps finance their development. I personally believe that could also work for other distribution channels, such as a private APT repository, or equivalent to other platforms. People could still build by themselves from sources if that's what they want, and if you want convenience you buy th…

That's exactly what Aseprite (a pixel-art tool) does. I think it's great, I got it to build on Windows but eventually ended up buying it on Steam because it's so good.

Re: How to pay your rent with your open source project

#26

Post by lima »

jcelerier wrote: post #11
tannhaeuser wrote: post #6

Good article, but I thought webpack is founded by The OpenJS Foundation these days, who are making an astonishing job of identifying and sustaining core web packages. Unfortunately, they also picked controversial software like AMP (in exchange for contributions by Google I guess) to make it appear a grassroots or "legitimate" effort. Also, I think the ongoing trend to slap a thin wrapper on top of F/OSS and sell it a…

> Also, I think the ongoing trend to slap a thin wrapper on top of F/OSS and sell it as a service (aka "the Cloud") points to a weakness in F/OSS licensing schemes that needs to be addressed as I'm sure that almost all devs working on F/OSS don't intend their work to become part of a lock-in scheme, mass surveillance, or both, all the while not even getting contributions back. the solution to "not even getting contri…

> almost all devs working on F/OSS

... a large fraction of OSS work these days is sponsored by corporations.

Re: How to pay your rent with your open source project

#27

Post by open-source-ux »

Confiks wrote: post #19
open-source-ux wrote: post #15

There is another option, unpopular with some open source advocates, the source-only option. You simply sell your software product (with source code) for a price. That's it. Simple and uncomplicated. Your customers get the source of your app. They can modify the code to suit their needs. But unlike open source, they cannot re-distribute the app. Very few companies would object to this. Some popular and profitable proj…

An alternative to this option that might make both camps happy is to use the Business Source License [1] that is source-only for new changes, and automatically become open source after a certain time (default after 4 years). It allows creators to let customers pay for new features and support, while at the same time 'derisking' vendor lock-in by automatically converting to an open source license. [1] https://mariadb.…

There is also the Fair Source License which has a short, readable license: https://fair.io

Re: How to pay your rent with your open source project

#28

Post by diffeomorphism »

open-source-ux wrote: post #15

There is another option, unpopular with some open source advocates, the source-only option. You simply sell your software product (with source code) for a price. That's it. Simple and uncomplicated. Your customers get the source of your app. They can modify the code to suit their needs. But unlike open source, they cannot re-distribute the app. Very few companies would object to this. Some popular and profitable proj…

That is just "sell your software as closed source". Certainly that works, but not really related to the title.

> can still study and learn from the source code.

But will have to be careful not to use any of it and have no possibility of contributing improvements.

Re: How to pay your rent with your open source project

#29

Post by leotaku »

dgellow wrote: post #12
leotaku wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One problem I see is that for more tech-savy Linux users, which are the people most CLI software is targeted at, convenience means simply installing something via their distributions package manager. I am not interested in downloading your precompiled static binary or setting up your private repository. I want to run `foo install bar` and get on with my work. On the other hand there are some more mainstream optionall…

You’re right regarding the convenience point, to have a chance to work it has to be as straightforward as possible to buy and then install your tools. I understand the difference people expect from GUI vs CLI, I just don’t think it really makes sense to be ok to pay for one but not the other, and I see it as a missed opportunity for tool creators. Edit: Regarding Linux users as the main target, I don’t know if that’s…

I fully agree that it is unfair to creators that they cannot reasonably generate income from CLI apps. Still, I am unconvinced that the model you are proposing could gain viable traction.

It might be that I am in a sysadmin bubble here, but I just think that the "paid store" model conflicts with how people use CLI software.

For example, I suppose even the MacOS developers you mentioned would be interested in running e.g. `jq` on remote servers, virtual machines, docker, ... How could good UX possibly be achieved here? If you lock your hypothetical store down even a little bit, users now have to do complicated secrets management. If you don't and simply hope that everyone actually pays, you might as well just ask for donations.

Re: How to pay your rent with your open source project

#30

Post by cuu508 »

Confiks wrote: post #19
open-source-ux wrote: post #15

There is another option, unpopular with some open source advocates, the source-only option. You simply sell your software product (with source code) for a price. That's it. Simple and uncomplicated. Your customers get the source of your app. They can modify the code to suit their needs. But unlike open source, they cannot re-distribute the app. Very few companies would object to this. Some popular and profitable proj…

An alternative to this option that might make both camps happy is to use the Business Source License [1] that is source-only for new changes, and automatically become open source after a certain time (default after 4 years). It allows creators to let customers pay for new features and support, while at the same time 'derisking' vendor lock-in by automatically converting to an open source license. [1] https://mariadb.…

Another company using BSL that many here would be familiar with is Sentry.

I recently stumbled across a podcast where David Cramer, CTO of Sentry, talks about their move to BSL: https://changelog.com/podcast/371

I don't have a strong opinion on what's the "right" license for services like Sentry, but for me this was definitely worth a listen.

Post reply on HN