[eropple]

That's not a sufficient test, because when put under the gun there's no reason not to believe that a company playing those kinds of games won't take that pull request, temporarily improving the situation, and then simply make no effort to keep it up to date later. Addresses the temporary embarrassment, but not the underlying problem.

Mind, I don't think Plane's one of these. The open-source release seems comprehensive and the doc just seems not very good because the people who wrote it are experienced operators. But the claim being made isn't one that's easily put to rest except through the company in question committing to enthusiastic and comprehensive support that dispels doubts. (And, well--they chose that life!)

[brlewis]

That's a sufficient test. It's the community's prerogative to keep it up to date later with further PRs. I don't expect anyone, whether a company or a volunteer, to do ongoing maintenance work on features that don't directly serve them. The thing I'm testing for is whether they'd block someone else contributing a change that doesn't serve that company or volunteer.

[plorkyeran]

Yeah, my experience with working at a startup that did fairly explicitly rely on self-hosting being hard enough that people would pay us instead was that we definitely never had to go out of our way to make that be the case. Making self-hosting easy is a significant amount of continuously ongoing work and we simply underinvested in that. If someone did all that work for us one time we would have happily accepted it.