←back to thread

Sourcegraph went dark

(eric-fritz.com)
424 points kaycebasques | 8 comments | 20 Aug 24 03:30 UTC | HN request time: 0.414s | source | bottom
Show context
sqs ◴[20 Aug 24 10:28 UTC] No.41298641[source]▶
Sourcegraph CEO here. We made our main internal codebase (for our code search product) private. We did this to focus. It added a lot of extra work and risk to have stuff be open source and public. We gotta stay focused on building a great code search/intelligence product for our customers.

That's what ultimately lets us still do plenty of things for devs and the OSS community:

(1) Our super popular public code search is at https://sourcegraph.com/search, which is the same product customers use internally on their own codebases. We spend millions of dollars annually on this public instance with almost 1M OSS repositories to help out everyone using OSS (and we love when they like it so much they bring it into their company :-).

(2) We also have still have a ton of open-source code, like https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/sourcegraph/cody (our code AI tool).

BTW, if any founders out there are wondering whether they should make their own code open-source or public, happy to chat! Email in profile. I think it could make sense for a lot of companies, but more so for infrastructure products or client tools, not so much for full server-side end-user applications.

replies(14): >>41298707 #>>41299099 #>>41299575 #>>41299592 #>>41299724 #>>41299784 #>>41299956 #>>41300159 #>>41300346 #>>41300771 #>>41301859 #>>41305881 #>>41311564 #>>41312895 #
1. depr ◴[20 Aug 24 14:23 UTC] No.41300346[source]▶
I hope code search will one day be offered at a lower price, so small/medium sized companies can use the product. I'll never be able to convince someone to buy it when it's 3 or more time as expensive source code hosting, and would in many cases be most expensive SaaS product per developer seat that the company uses. But it's a great product.
replies(3): >>41300433 #>>41300434 #>>41300526 #
2. prepend ◴[20 Aug 24 14:31 UTC] No.41300433[source]▶
I feel the same way. It’s really interesting and provides cool insights. But it seems hard to explain to myself to spend more on that than GitHub or IDEs.

I’d like to hear more about the value customers get out of it as I wonder if it’s just groups with unlimited budget.

3. 0x1ch ◴[20 Aug 24 14:31 UTC] No.41300434[source]▶
$9 to $20 per seat seems pretty average in the grand scheme of SaaS price modelling. I don't work in software development, but IT however.
replies(3): >>41301845 #>>41303030 #>>41321824 #
4. beyang ◴[20 Aug 24 14:41 UTC] No.41300526[source]▶
This is in the cards and thank you for the feedback! (Sourcegraph CTO here)
replies(1): >>41312918 #
5. hk__2 ◴[20 Aug 24 17:09 UTC] No.41301845[source]▶
> $9 to $20 per seat seems pretty average in the grand scheme of SaaS price modelling.

"SaaS" is not a feature; you can’t compare products just based on the fact thay they are "SaaS". Gitlab for example brings me far more value than a tool to search my codebase; I wouldn’t put the same amount of money in both.

6. morgante ◴[20 Aug 24 19:15 UTC] No.41303030[source]▶
Last time I got a quote it was >$5k minimum to use code search.
7. hud_dev ◴[21 Aug 24 18:37 UTC] No.41312918[source]▶
What would you say...you do here?
8. depr ◴[22 Aug 24 16:14 UTC] No.41321824[source]▶
That is Cody (AI coding assistant). Search is 49 per seat.