One person finally created a working release train on github and was releasing OSS containers, Docker Hub reports it as 10k+ pulls, which is a lot for unofficial image.
I tend to stay away from any 3rd party tool that's not really a main part of infrastructure and requires sales contacts. It's wasting my company time to deal with sales when it comes to a few licenses, just give me a number input and buy button. I also lost some confidence regarding Sourcegraph, as it seems they change their direction, pricing and rules multiple times per year
Nice. How to get free marketing by strapping Open Source to your product and writing a bunch of announcements.
We'll probably see more of these faux OSS projects who hoped for some community/network effect from being OSS to translate into either strong donations or considerable uptake of their enterprise/cloud/managed versions go this route.
To be clear, fully support charging for and paying for SaaS. Would just like be able to know what is in front of me when making build/buy decisions.
I've even found a page still mentioning the OSS version and telling you how easy it is to fire it up.
When you realize that one of your products isn’t being heavily used and is OSS, you don’t close source it, you keep it open!
This shows that the value add of the paid product is actually worth it to customers.
Now?
Not so much.
Why are companies isolating themselves from smaller clients?
It's really healthy for a company to have a whole spectrum of clients, from people that chip in 2-4$ per month for a minor bump in capabilities and without any support included to big companies that push for exploring new features.
In my opinion, Gitlab is a primary example of feature-creep and it will be the demise of the company.
Gitlab was VC funded which means it had little choice but to take on a high risk/high reward approach. It worked fairly well since it IPOed at $12b while it's last round of funding was at under $3b. Good return for VCs. Of course the stock is down over 50% since IPO but that's someone else's problem.
Of course that skips the bigger picture like more people knowing and using your products and being happy with them leads to more champions for them doing your sales and marketing work for you, which can create lots of revenue in the long term; but it's pretty much impossible to quantify.
No wonder my enterprise is automatically kicking people off when they don’t use it.
In every tier there are $49/month "core" users (basic dashboard viewing, no editing, no APM, no monitoring, no tracing...)
In the "Standard" tier you have $99/month "full" users, but you're limited to 5 total users, no SSO, and AFAIK very basic support.
In the "Pro" tier you have $418.80/month "full" users
In the "Enterprise" tier you have $658.80/month "full" users
No wonder people is paying for core users and then juggling generic full users. Although they limit you at 3 concurrent sessions at the same time, and monitor that, and will contact you if you login from different IPs and browsers to the same users.
The most interesting part for me is Pixie... but you can do that for free.
A few months later and 70 registered users, I have a total of 3 users who used it a few times.
I've done a demo and created documentation, 80% of the developers at $MY_COMPANY used Sourcegraph Code Search at least a few times in the past month, some of them are doing a dozen searches per day.
My company lives in code search. Most bug fixes and small enhancements start by investigating code search, and clicking a link from code search to start editing the file.
However it’s not that bad because we work mostly on short lived research projects and it’s not that much to reuse. Public code search and ChatGPT are used much frequently.