[franciscop]

To answer this I would ask what is the biggest reason to do Open Source. As an individual, the main reason to do that last step and publishing what I do as open source is so other people can use+benefit from it and monetizing it would hinder this.

Now there are many great secondary reasons as an individual, in no particular order: I learn a lot, I got some paying gigs from my open source, better code through more eyeballs, it builds curriculum/personal brand, it feels good to be complimented, etc. For companies I'll guess also it's a great recruiting tool as you are not a name in the dark but you show your code (I've considered that when looking for a job).

Oh wait, I totally (honestly) forgot about your main question when listing the benefits. I would say that the common feeling (at least in JS world) is that open source does not give direct money, so few projects start with the intention of getting it and later on it's more difficult.

If you try to do it there is a whole topic on this: https://opensource.guide/getting-paid/

To OP, since you've opened this discussion would you please share your thinking as well?

[indigochill]

Another reason some companies publish open source code is to recruit contributors. Contributors already know what they're doing and are clearly passionate enough about the product to spend time on it for free, so they may be a natural hire when a position opens.

[exelius]

I think you're vastly overstating it.

The main reason most companies open source stuff is because they had to build something for some reason or another, the thing works, but they don't want to maintain it because it's plumbing and it's not mission-critical.

Sometimes it's easier to throw the thing on GitHub (where others might find it and at least use it) than throw it in your company's internal repository (where nobody will ever find it and it will rot away).

[eeZah7Ux]

Citation needed!

Most of the time it's much easier to leave stuff in internal repos than doing the effort to review and approve stuff for publishing.

[franciscop]

Well put, I see that as a combination of "better code through more eyeballs" and "great recruiting tool".

[techspring]

In general, my thought is that by finding an unobtrusive way to generate revenue you can devote more time to the project and produce a higher quality, better supported product. This of course necessitates that the project is valuable enough to justify spending additional resources on making it significantly better.

In my mind, the best revenue model for OSS is something that is opt-in. For example, if a company wants to pay for enhanced support they can, but if not they can use the software and rely on community/best-effort support.

The main goal in my mind should be making greater resources available to the project while still allowing free use.