Most active commenters
  • pjmlp(4)
  • kstrauser(3)

←back to thread

Sourcegraph went dark

(eric-fritz.com)
424 points kaycebasques | 14 comments | 20 Aug 24 03:30 UTC | HN request time: 1.335s | source | bottom
Show context
iddan ◴[20 Aug 24 09:39 UTC] No.41298398[source]▶
I wonder from all the people commenting here how much they relied on Source Graph, and how many actually paid for it. Running an open-source company is hard, just like running any company is. Sometimes you understand there are things you just can't give out for free, and that's part of maturing as a company.
replies(3): >>41298505 #>>41298952 #>>41302581 #
1. pjmlp ◴[20 Aug 24 10:00 UTC] No.41298505[source]▶
100% this.

Devs have to learn the hard way to behave like the other professionals, want nice things to stay around?

Pay for the tools.

replies(3): >>41298614 #>>41301578 #>>41301994 #
2. sunaookami ◴[20 Aug 24 10:24 UTC] No.41298614[source]▶
Paying doesn't guarantee anything. There are tons of examples of devs selling out even though their program/SaaS is paid.
replies(2): >>41298667 #>>41298732 #
3. alephnerd ◴[20 Aug 24 10:32 UTC] No.41298667[source]▶
Companies are run based on margins, not just subscriptions.

That individual account you are paying for most likely does not have the RoI needed to manage it due to a mix of larger customers abusing individual accounts to get a discount or individual account users overrepresenting themselves in support tickets, asks, and feature requests.

If you don't like the direction a tool you like is going, go build a competitor and manage it to your liking.

For most products, the revenue skew is 80-20 so if you're not part of the 20% you aren't going to be heard.

4. pjmlp ◴[20 Aug 24 10:44 UTC] No.41298732[source]▶
Until supermarkets and landlords start taking pull requests as payment, it guarantees more often than not.
5. marcinzm ◴[20 Aug 24 16:39 UTC] No.41301578[source]▶
You mean pay for your own tools and then get fired for circumventing the corporate security policies on what tools you can use?
replies(1): >>41307048 #
6. hk__2 ◴[20 Aug 24 17:23 UTC] No.41301994[source]▶
This tool is $49/user/mo. That’s more than the price I pay for a single 12-core + 64GB RAM server!

Edit: Ah, and it’s 50 users minimum, so the starting price is $2450/mo.

replies(2): >>41302066 #>>41307081 #
7. kstrauser ◴[20 Aug 24 17:32 UTC] No.41302066[source]▶
Ouch. That's also well above the threshold where we'd have to get IT approval to use them as a vendor, complete with security reviews, comparison shopping with other vendors, bringing in the legal team to look at the contract, etc. It's not "just" writing a check for $30K and calling it a day.
replies(1): >>41307458 #
8. pjmlp ◴[21 Aug 24 05:29 UTC] No.41307048[source]▶
I expect my employer to pay for the tools they require me to use for my job.

Likewise I pay in various forms (books, donations, one time payment, subscriptions), for the tools I use regularly outside my job, for side projects.

9. pjmlp ◴[21 Aug 24 05:34 UTC] No.41307081[source]▶
Yes, now do the math, if you owned a company, how much monthly revenue you must get per month to pay everyone at a similar salary level, plus government related taxes, office space, electricity, water.
replies(1): >>41327259 #
10. morgante ◴[21 Aug 24 06:44 UTC] No.41307458{3}[source]▶
The unfortunate truth (that I've had to learn the hard way as a founder) is that whole IT approval process is inevitable for any vendor indexing source code.

Even when I've tried to offer lower price tiers, ~every company of 20+ people puts a ton of bureaucracy in place before disclosing source code. Dealing with this bureaucracy has a fixed cost, so it's inevitable that many companies end up excluding the lower end entirely.

replies(1): >>41312093 #
11. kstrauser ◴[21 Aug 24 16:57 UTC] No.41312093{4}[source]▶
The sweetest words in any purchase: "on prem". It avoids so very many such hassles.
replies(1): >>41312244 #
12. morgante ◴[21 Aug 24 17:14 UTC] No.41312244{5}[source]▶
Customers who insist on on prem require the most support burden and hassles.

Have you shipped commercial on-prem software? Nobody wants to do it for <$1k. It's miserable.

replies(1): >>41314202 #
13. kstrauser ◴[21 Aug 24 21:07 UTC] No.41314202{6}[source]▶
I have and you're right. But in the context we're discussing here of buying software that has access to sensitive company data, on-prem is so much easier to approve.
14. hk__2 ◴[23 Aug 24 08:41 UTC] No.41327259{3}[source]▶
I pay for the product, not the company.