alt Hacker NewsRe-asking [0] as a top-level question, since it has gone unanswered: do you intend to make a business out of this project in some way, or is it a "real" open source project?
I know that intentions can change, but I'm curious how you see it. Sourcegraph was pretty clearly always going to be a business-type-of-project, and like most business projects, relicensed everything to their custom enterprise license. Originally it was Apache 2 [1].
I love open source and I write a lot of it myself [2]. I use the MIT license, just like you've done here, and I admire that. I don't think you owe me or anyone else anything, and the MIT license makes that clear.
I am very interested in this project and I'd love to extend and contribute to it, but only if it's an actual open source project. Seems like every devtools-focused startup these days calls themselves "open source" but fails to actually build a community, because in reality it's just a marketing gimmick. Because the project is actually a company, the people involved never try very hard to build a community of contributors. When the company invariably cannot make money with an open source product, the code gets relicensed to be closed-source. The few people who had contributed end up getting played. That's what happened to Sourcegraph!
So: open source, or open source "for now"?
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41715776
[1]: https://github.com/sourcegraph/sourcegraph-public-snapshot/c...
Replies
Thanks for the thoughtful question.
This is still day 1, so we honestly don't have an answer if we will get to a point where we can monetize - it's too early to tell. However if we do end up going down that road, I don't think generating revenue and being a good steward of open source is mutually exclusive.
My view is that there is a balance that can exist between open source and building a profitable business that doesn't negatively impact the open source community. Companies that come to mind that I think are striking this balance are PostHog & GitLab.
Not the author, but given that this is a relatively small UI wrapper of a zoekt[1] backend, it seems like the risk here is isolated to the upstream Sourcegraph-maintained search dependency. By relatively small, I mean that the total SLOC for UI code in the entire project is around ~3.5k (compared to the backend which is currently 25x the size). Seems difficult to ascribe any enterprise motivations given that and additionally the UI seems very useful as-is even if you had to fork it and build a new community from there.
[1] https://github.com/sourcegraph/zoekt