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

Devtools must be open source

blog.exe.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 262 posts

Re: Devtools must be open source

#251

Post by skybrian »

jedberg wrote: post #96

I've worked at a DevTools company and been the CEO of one too. Here's my thoughts: I agree that they need to be open source. But that makes it really hard to make a successful business. Sure, there are examples of success, but also many examples of successful open source tools never becoming successful companies. The most famous example is Sendmail (where I worked way back in the day). They took millions in funding a…

Open sourcing devtools seems like a "commodify your complement" thing. A way to do that is to sell hosting. People can self-host if they want to, but some people will prefer to pay a hosting service.

This is what exe.dev is doing. Their open source devtools (like Shelley) sit on top of their hosting service and could be self-hosted. But they aren't open sourcing the software they use to run their VM hosting service.

Re: Devtools must be open source

#252

Post by skybrian »

conqrr wrote: post #88

Well we can go a step further and say Devtools must not be VC funded too :) Till date, the best and greatest dev tools I've used have not been influenced by VC decisions.

It seems like an odd purity test to advocate for on a Y Combinator website. Why are you here if you're so worried about being influenced by VC's?

Re: Devtools must be open source

#254

Post by skybrian »

rvz wrote: post #14

This is one of the only fields where the customer (developers) almost never pays for their own tools and instead builds their own or even to compete against another developer. Then, they later realize why human developers in open source burnout so easily. Not even Richard Stallman or Linus Torvalds make money on open source or free software despite preaching it. They actually make money from speaking fees. "Open sour…

Why not use both open source and closed source software? Pick your battles. It's okay to buy a Mac or pay a hosting provider. Customize the tools that actually matter to you.

Re: Devtools must be open source

#255

Post by nextblock »

davisr wrote: post #189
ameliaquining wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AGPL software is in practice always gratis, because anyone who has a copy can post it on the internet where anyone can download it. The monetization benefit of AGPL is that it makes it significantly more annoying (but by no means impossible) for IaaS providers to sell managed hosting for the software without making a separate commercial agreement with the copyright holder. This usually isn't relevant to dev tools tha…

You say this as a fact, but you're wrong and I'm living proof of that. You can earn good income selling copies of AGPL software. It doesn't matter if people upload it to a public place, that's their right, and *that right* is why so many people buy a copy in the first place. You are spreading FUD.

Also, the money can be made selling premium package/modules/features on that Free core AGPL software.

Re: Devtools must be open source

#256

Post by pvtmert »

simonw wrote: post #3

One of the arguments for open source software for end-users has always been the freedom to examine and modify how that software works. The reality for most people - even expert programmers - has been that the freedom is more about being able to lean on other people to do that. Most people can't justify the time commitment needed to read and then modify the code for tools they use very often. I think LLMs have changed…

I have sent several bugfixes to software I used as a "daily driver". I did the same when I was working at Amazon. While managers didn't usually understand the benefits of saving a minute or two from the test suite runner, at the scale I think it had tremendous impact. Especially when it comes to the cycle time during development. (Also relevant during the agentic workflows)

Since the code became a commodity, it is beneficial for companies to "open source" it. As the cost of doing so is negligible compared to the "responsibility transfer" by acquiring a license.

Re: Devtools must be open source

#257

Post by danbruc »

1718627440 wrote: post #247
danbruc wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Updating a constant versus a config parameter isn’t all that different if the build is fast. Not even remotely true except that in both cases you change a number in some text file. If you do it in source code, you have to get the source code, you have to identify the correct line[s], you need a build environment, you might have to reinstall the new version after the build. And on top of this you want to involve a lan…

> you need a build environment If you have a self-sufficient OS, the build environment is already part of it. > you have to identify the correct line[s] Just run a full-text search on the old value.

Just run a full-text search on the old value.

How often does 10 appear in the code base? And is the value you are looking for even 10 or does only the UI show 10 points but in code it is defined as 200 twip?

Re: Devtools must be open source

#258

Post by nh23423fefe »

BigTTYGothGF wrote: post #115
nh23423fefe wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasted time trying to understand sarcasm instead of being given a clear point to read. Bad human.

> I wasted time trying to understand sarcasm Skill issue.

another very original human repeating the meme
Post reply on HN