←back to thread

Sourcegraph went dark

(eric-fritz.com)
424 points kaycebasques | 1 comments | 20 Aug 24 03:30 UTC | HN request time: 0.205s | source
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 #
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 #
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 #
1. 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.