To be clear, I’m not looking to make any meaningful money off my own project (which is “just” a dashboard).
But if we want self-hosted software to become a real alternative to commercial services, we need people, especially developers, to care enough to build and maintain it.
Sure, AI is changing things. It’s easier than ever to build your own software, but even with AI, I wouldn’t be able to replace all the online services I use. And I doubt most people would either. Building something is one thing, maintaining it over the years is another. It’s still a serious amount of free time to dedicate to something.
What actually got me thinking about this was Heaper, a self-hosted cloud alternative that uses CRDTs. I’d really like to see it succeed because it’s doing something genuinely different from what’s already out there.
And I think those are exactly the kinds of projects we should be supporting. Software that offers real value in everyday use and gives people a reason to move away from commercial services.
But relying on donations clearly isn’t enough to sustain development for most projects. Providing a hosted version does conflict with the main idea of a service being self-hosted.
Then there are apps like Plex, which keep raising their subscription prices. At some point, you have to wonder what the financial benefit of self-hosting even is if every service comes with another subscription.
I’m not saying self-hosting always needs to be cheaper. I’m fine with paying for good software, especially if it supports the people developing it. But part of the appeal of self-hosting is having control over your own services without having to worry about a growing list of recurring bills.
Larger open-source projects can sometimes fund development through business licenses or public funding, but that doesn’t necessarily work for smaller projects.
I don’t really have a solution here. I just think we need better ways to financially support the developers building software we actually want to use, without turning self-hosting into another collection of subscriptions.
What do you think would be a reasonable way to fund these projects?
The classic approach to this is running a business that offers hosted versions of the self-hosted technology for a price, and offers documentation for self-hosting the stack on the same page. Users click the button for what they want.
And the business offers support contracts for a price. A business can buy these so if they run into an issue they can contact you directly to help resolve the issue. Some of these support contracts go further to allow feature requests and you they pay you for new things for that business.
Universal Basic Income.
If someone could explain how this could ever work in a world full of selfish turds, I might stop cringing every time it’s mentioned. I’m not mad at it, and don’t think someone who talks about it is stupid. I own my ignorance on the subject, but I also embrace my absolute distrust and disgust with the human race.
Aren’t the selfish turds the billionaires? Or who are talking about?
Firefighter, nurse, social care, domestic work, teaching, childcare is done underpay or freely. Those job are the basic of society, and is not done because of “selfish turds”. However they are some, and they do have the half of global wealth. So taking everything to them and giving back to everyone is one way
Could you explain WHY you don’t think it could work? ‘Selfish turds’ is a bit too generic to give an answer to.
Charging corporation. Making it free for personal use and nonprofits
This is the right way, but you will have to deal with FOSS devotees grumbling because your software doesn’t meet the OSI’s definition of open source.
I’m torn; ideologically I like the idea of “open means open,” but in practice that seems to result in corporations taking endlessly from FOSS while giving little to nothing back (or giving nothing but bug reports). How do projects like Blender get away with it?
The answer is AGPLv3, or an exception if a corporation pays for one (in which case it just becomes a commercial license).
Charging corporations is not a violation of OSI’s definition.
Their definition is free as in speech, not as in beer.
Maybe artists are just less greedy than the average tech bro?
Charge for every use of it but keep it Foss. Aseprite charges $30 and most people pay but some cheap cunts(me) compile it from source. I’ll pay eventually I’m still deciding if its a useful tool or not.
If you want to make it free $0 dont complain if you make no money from it since that was your choice.
Europe is increasingly funding projects through NGOs and government foundations. If FOSS software is a public good, then we should devote public funds to it.
Some projects offer paid hosting for those who can’t or don’t wasn’t to self-host. Some (particularly mobile apps) push a paid version to stores to subsidize those using FOSS sources to download.
I have a feeling that shit is about to stop. Look at the war on encryption.
For the immediate future, Europeans are personally and politically invested in digital sovereignty. The best way to get ahead quickly is to invest in open source projects. For the time being, interests seem to be aligned in favor of FOSS.
Of course, you are right. It can’t last forever.
But if we want self-hosted software to become a real alternative to commercial services, we need people, especially developers, to care enough to build and maintain it.
Is it a real alternative. And not just that, in many cases it’s better. There are many good projects out there which developers care enough about to maintain that make no money at all, simply because those developers enjoy doing that, or if they see the benefit to building such software.
Sometimes they provide solutions like paid hosting while keeping the self hosted version free.
I’m the lead dev at my job. I started using a self hosted software because it was available to me without asking for budget. We used it for about 8 months and during budgeting, I decided to add this self hosted software to my teams budget because the self hosted software grew to the point where I didn’t want to manage it anymore.
Imagine building things without monetary incentive. But the minute you want compensation then this whole system you think you want is just childish bullshit and kept alive barely so you can innovate new tools that corporate people can use without paying for R&D.
The previous generation did amazing things. We’re the people who are there to enshittify it all by acting like a bunch of kids whose wealthy parents are dying.
Call it wistful thinking but I still believe donations are the way forward.
But it requires a bit of a shift in both willingness and ease.
Currently donations are also distributed pretty unfair, they go mostly to the user facing side, while crucial packages remain forgotten.
I would almost suggest some kind of system where you could set aside a certain amount of money, and it would donate automatically to all your installed packages, with some kind of weighting system I suppose.
I would almost suggest some kind of system where you could set aside a certain amount of money, and it would donate automatically to all your installed packages, with some kind of weighting system I suppose.
Welp, now you know what Free Software project you should start!
I would almost suggest some kind of system where you could set aside a certain amount of money, and it would donate automatically to all your installed packages, with some kind of weighting system I suppose.
that could be a new feature in liberapay or opencollective
Use whatever channel the developer provides.
Everyone deserves to be paid for their labor, since we don’t live in a post-scarcity world.
You have correctly identified the core issue with open source.
Personally speaking, as inefficient as it is, I think that donations is the best way to support a self hosted open source project.
Followed by paying for licensing to be able to get support for the product.
If your project is open source any other restriction out there, you can’t really do because they can just fork and patch the software to remove the restriction.
Due to that restriction(or lack of), I’ve always personally seen most open-source projects to be more of a hobbyist or personal project then a project that someone wants to do to make money.
Are You talking about https://heaper.de/
yes I have no idea how i messed that link up mightve pasted the wrong thing
First find a way to track your costs. Measure how much it costs to give it away (to your self and people that support you starting it as a buisness). Do market analysis based on those number. How much do you need to support both your operatiinal costs of hosting and devoloper time paid with a fair wage, and what does compare to how much consumers are currently paying. If that looks good invest in an accountant and lawyer to see what the buisness plan viability might look like and set up a LLC. From there look for partners that can help you create a sustainable buisness and fill in skill gaps you dont have, or hire out the rest.
Thats it.
Even better make it a community coop so that the skilled labor and community can have actual ownership in the org to help balance out thr risk and encourage litteral buyin.
bot post
just cause I’m trying to move from Reddit to lemmy doesn’t mean I’m a bot
