[franga2000]

If the company publishes the code, then closes, what's the harm? Any hard-coded creds would be invalid and any license violations wouldn't matter because there would be no company.

I'd love to hear about these "non-obvious" reasons, because I can't say "I'm embarrassed by my code" sounds like a good excuse after convincing people to move to your platform, charging them a subscription for it, then kicking them off with only 60 days notice.

And "I don't think others could figure out how to host it" isn't a reason not to release. It costs nothing but a pretty insignificant amount of time to publish it, so even if it's "impossible" to re-host (and history would say it's not), I really don't see a reason not to let people try.

[Kiro]

I think you're mistaking me for someone else. Otherwise I don't know where you got 60 days from but it's not true - I give them 0 days notice. I also never convince anyone to "move" to my projects. I tell them from day 1 that they should use it at their own risk but for some reason people insist on using it regardless. In fact, if anything I try to convince them not to use my platform (me: "it's really bad and early" they: "it's ok" me: "it probably won't work" they: "it's ok"). So don't hold me accountable for things like that.

[franga2000]

I see I wrote that very clumsily, sorry. I was talking about the Friday shutdown and replied to your comment as a general response to the reasons for not releasing code. Obviously personal projects or anything else you don't market and sell/rent out to people are completely different. fwiw, I'm quite similar with my personal projects, but if I took people's money for something and then had to shut it down, I'd do everything in my power to enable them to keep using it without me.

Sorry again for the confusion