

Ask YC: To open source or not, that is the question - shabda

We would be done building our app in around 15 more days. And I can't decide whether open sourcing this makes a good idea.<p>What is the app:<p>We plan to build an ERP for SMEs, which has the essential erp functions, common to all. Right now we are building a project management/tracking applications suitable for teams between 20-200 in size.<p>Why I should open source it:<p>1. We are just two people, so there would be bugs. Given enough eyeball all bugs are shallow.<p>2. User testing, like all startups we are poor. Hiring a full time QA is difficult. We can only do so much QA ourselves.<p>3. Publicity, Well we sure can use that.<p>Why we should not open source it.<p>1. This is not a hobby thing for me. We left our jobs to work on this, of course, because we want to make money out of this thing. Open sourcing makes difficult to monetize this. There is only so much you can charge for services.<p>2. This is not something which is going to be used by the end users, or is not a library. So the chances that we would get open source contribution in this seem far fetched.<p>I am thinking on the lines of dual licensing, where we release this under GPL/similar modified license if it needs to be used for less than say by 25 users or in a open source project, but ask that a license be bought when there are more than 25 users.
======
ericb
I may get down-modded for this, but I suggest not releasing it given the
scenario you described. I love open source, but most open source contributions
are made for joy of creation, pride, fame, sometimes naivete (by assuming
you'll get the benefits described) and finally, money. Many projects are
created because they're ancillary to some business need--like SUN paying
Charles Nutter to work on Jruby. These motives don't really apply to your
case, and the benefits you list don't materialize for most projects. It costs
you time to open source things properly and limits your options. Rightly or
wrongly, some companies will be reluctant to buy you with your code released.

Statistically, most open source projects do not gain traction, significant
users, free features, or free QA. They sit there on SourceForge, unloved. I
wish I had a citation here. Try browsing SourceForge projects. Publicity-wise,
consider how many you've heard of. It seems likely you'll get little in return
for open sourcing. It's like a dance, and there's a decent chance that Baby
will be put in a corner.

~~~
secorp
I would second this. We currently run an open-source project (distributed
storage) and commercial venture based upon it, but the open-source was the
driver done because we thought that it was an important problem to solve and
that it would be worth more as open-source than as a proprietary product. Our
commercial venture arose by choosing one specific application of the code and
building a business to address it. Note that our open-source project is
something that we (and others) have worked on independently of the commercial
venture. The community is separate (though aware) and drives the open-source
project in directions that we did not expect.

------
tomh
Hard choice. One other factor you didn't mention about is community. In
releasing your code to a wider audience, you are trying to create a community
around your code. Community requires support; a wiki/bug-tracker to post
problems and solutions, a mailing-list to support conversations and questions,
a robust source control server to host your code, and a understandable release
process to push out new versions.

Also, you will need to write a lot of documentation about your code, how to
install, how to extend, etc. You will probably want to write a FAQ first to
fend off first-time newbie questions about installation, management, etc.

You will also have to make conscientious decisions about what versions your
software will run on, and which requests you will support -- we run a stack on
Tomcat 5.5 with Java 5, for example, but we have gotten X amount of questions
about support for Java 6, JBoss, JRun, etc etc etc.

My two cents: it's rough to get other people involved. The good karma for
open-sourcing can be more trouble if you are not organized about how to handle
and attract new members to your project.

------
bdfh42
First off - don't let me put you off - you are managers of your own destiny
but...

I am not sure that SMEs do a lot of formal project management - they might
just possibly buy a copy of MS Project but that's as far as it goes in the
main. I am sure there is a generic ERP market among SMEs but those folks are
careful with their money - spending it in areas that are more central to the
areas where they make money. One problem area is going to be the sheer
diversity of the market place - large corporations are remarkably similar
(hence the wide adoption of SAP perhaps) - but SMEs tend to run leaner and
making more use of individual skills - thus shaping their operational
procedures around people rather than corporate "this is how it's done". I
would look for a vertical market to tackle first while striving to make each
ERP component as generic as possible. Good luck anyway.

~~~
shabda
They do not right now, but if we provide enough value above what can be
achieved with MS project, why would they not be willing to part with their
money? (Ah, or so I wish :) )

------
rcoder
Let me see if I've got this right: you want to open source your code so you
can get a bunch of free bug fixes, QA testing, and positive press, and what
you're offering in exchange is a crippled, deployment-size-limited version of
your package for small teams and other open source projects?

Thanks, but no thanks.

It sounds to me like you simply don't have the resources you need to develop
your system, and want to get a bunch of free labor from the OSS community
without really opening your code.

If you're going to go open source, you're still going to need folks to do
documentation, QA, and marketing. You're still going to have to plan and
manage releases. Hell, you're going to have to fight an uphill battle
convincing some managers they should pay you for _anything_ when the base
product is "free."

Plus, you're going to have a community just itching to fork your product and
put you out of business at the first sign of you putting your bottom line
ahead of their interests.

Do yourself a favor, and either scale back the scope of your project so it's
something you _can_ handle, or find the resources to staff up and finish the
damn thing. Then decide if you want to open source the code base. Just don't
expect something for nothing.

------
davidw
How's it different/better than something like OFBiz or one of the other open
source systems? What's your edge over all the other project management things
out there?

With open source, you're essentially foregoing any revenue from licensing in
the hope that you'll make money consulting, unless you do something like have
a GPL library where people will pay to be able to link to it in proprietary
apps.

I'm not entirely convinced that the world needs yet another project management
thing. I think it had either be really good and far better than what's out
there now, in which case you can charge for it, or... perhaps another
direction is best?

PS: YC's formatting isn't very advanced.

~~~
shabda
> I think it had either be really good and far better than

>what's out there now, in which case you can charge for it

That is what we plan to do. The idea is that over time, we will have a full
service, not just a project management. A hrms system, a payroll system, a
project management system, which all tie together. That is what makes big ERPs
be able to charge such high licensing fee. This is what we plan to bring to
SMEs

~~~
davidw
To be very blunt: I don't know, I'm just not convinced that two guys are going
to go up against even existing open source systems... Not impossible, but I
don't see it as easy unless you really have something up your sleeves.

------
cstejerean
Open source it for non commercial use. Don't expect much benefit from open
sourcing at first. It takes patience to build a decent community around an
open source project.

While most open source projects never gain any traction, plenty of companies
have thrived with an open source model. (Not all end up like MySQL though)

~~~
davidw
If it's open source, you can't dictate what people do with it. That's part of
the definition. You could use a license like the GPL that means they're not
going to take it proprietary, but it's simply not open source if you can't use
it for what you want.

~~~
cstejerean
GPL only covers source code. It doesn't cover other copyrighted works (like
help manuals, logos and other text) or allow users to user your trademarks. So
while the source code is open you only license use of all the other material
for noncommercial use.

