undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrubymamis2y ago0 comments

Plume is built on top of my open source note-taking app Notes[1]. Since Plume is based on Notes, I'll of course comply with the MPL license and release all existing files that were changed (and must stay MPL licensed).

But I recently discussed my reasoning to go close-source[2]. I've been working night and day (every day) converting 4 cups of coffee into code for the last 4.5 months to create Plume. I don't want to risk not being rewarded sufficiently for it. But, I'm 99% sure that I'll either open source the core block editor or the entire app in the future.

[1] https://github.com/nuttyartist/notes

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38584960

0 comments

ayewo2y ago

> But, I'm 99% sure that I'll either open source the core block editor or the entire app in the future.

Why withhold the remaining 1%? If you aren't so confident about your decision to open source, there's no need to commit to that decision now.

It's good that you are leaving the door open, but keep in mind that if some folks suddenly become successful with a service that can turn any GitHub repo into a nice looking SaaS, at the click of a button and for a super low fee, I'm pretty sure you'll be hesitant to open source all your hard work so it can harvested.

rubymamisOP2y ago

Because I'm very much still a believer in open source. And you're right, that's a horror scenario I want to avoid. I'll only open source it in a way that won't compromise the sustainability of my work. I've yet to come up with the right model, so until then, it will stay close source.