| This is an important conversation and I can't help but think that it is repeatedly drawn in predictably valley-minded directions. As a responsible developer your use case is likely: "I want to install package X, and know that my customers are receiving and installing that package when they perform a build" The fact that individuals cannot self-host content has been held back by the limitations of DNS (content addressing) and IPv4 (routability) for a long time now. What I ask is this: if you as a developer were able to self-host the libraries and applications you offer to others -- regardless of whether they're open source or proprietary -- would that not solve most of these perverse incentive situations? - The bandwidth costs would be yours, but that would allow you to find a charging model that works - If your software became extremely successful - beyond your own ability to pay for the bandwidth - then the companies and individuals who rely upon your software would be incentivized to step in to foot the bill - Data about software adoption and usage would be de-rigueur shared with the providers who offer the bandwidth for it - We would not be reliant (in a community sense, but also in a day-to-day operations sense) on the benevolent albeit often-loss-leading hosting of centralized repositories |