←back to thread

Show HN: DrawDB – open-source online database diagram editor (a retro)

(www.drawdb.app)
263 points 1ilit | 1 comments | 09 Apr 25 00:20 UTC | HN request time: 1.598s | source

One year ago I open-sourced my very first 'real' project and shared it here. I was a college student in my senior year and desperately looking for a job. At the time of sharing it i couldn't even afford a domain and naively let someone buy the one i had my eyes on lol. It's been a hell of a year with this blowing up, me moving to another country, and switching 2 jobs.

In a year we somehow managed to hit 26k stars, grow a 1000+ person discord community, and support 37 languages. I couldn't be more grateful for the community that helped this grow, but now i don't know what direction to take this project in.

All of this was an accident. But now I feel like I'm missing out on not using this success. I have been thinking of monetization options, but not sure if I wanna go down that route. I like the idea of it being free and available for everyone but also can't help but think of everything that could be done if committed full-time or even had a small team. I keep telling myself(and others) i'll do something if i meet a co-founder, but doubt and fear of blowing this up keeps back.

How would you proceed?

1. evanelias ◴[09 Apr 25 15:55 UTC] No.43633530[source]▶
Looks really great! But regarding monetization, one word of caution that other commenters haven't mentioned so far: make sure you have a really good understanding of the licensing concerns before proceeding.

Initial disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

Your project is using AGPL, without a CLA, and you have third-party contributors. If I understand correctly, this essentially prevents anyone from having an enhanced closed-source version (SaaS or otherwise) of your product -- even you. Although you created it, you only own the copyright for your own portion of the code. Third party contributors own the copyright for their contributions, which are equally subject to the terms of the AGPL for everyone.

So if you wanted to monetize an enhanced version, you have two options, if I understand correctly:

A) Keep the enhanced version entirely open source. You can charge for a hosted version but users must be able to self-host. Obvious downside: this leads to weird misaligned incentives where your revenue can depend on your project being difficult to install/host.

or

B) Obtain a licensing agreement from all third-party contributors since the time you switched to AGPL, or completely re-write any code where you can't get that agreement. Might not be practical.

You could try alternative monetization methods that don't rely on an enhanced version, such as support contracts or sponsored development of new features, but these are hard to scale... especially since a decent number of tech companies have a blanket ban on using AGPL projects that aren't dual-licensed.

This isn't to say AGPL is bad, just that it's a nuanced topic. There are lots of blog posts out there about the monetization implications, for example here's one from the cofounder of GitLab: https://www.opencoreventures.com/blog/agpl-license-is-a-non-...