| This is a great initiative, but one wonders to which degree this is mostly a marketing stunt, white-washing their own "fair source" efforts. Sentry is a multi-billion company, and Open Source pays exactly none of their bills (though it may serve other purposes). This leads to pages such as [1] where they actively steer users away from self-hosting their "open source" (in name only) solution. Much has been said about Sentry's switch to "Fair Source"[2], but for me personally, the ship of "open source in name only" sailed long before that with the ever-increasing complexity of managing your own setup.[3] It’s clear that the priority here has shifted to pushing users toward their hosted, paid plans. Business models beat licenses every time if you want to understand actual intentions. Disclaimer: I am the solo-everything at a competitor, which is in fact _not_ Open Source.[4] [1] https://sentry.io/resources/self-hosted-vs-cloud/ (click on pdf for scary pictures) [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41171665 [3] https://github.com/getsentry/sentry/
commit/78bc759d1be4fa6b8ae3e2764e7156e05eb22ab9 [4] https://www.bugsink.com/ |
The point about "open source in name only" due to hosting complexity overlooks that this is a natural consequence of the product's evolution, not malicious intent. Enterprise-grade scaling of such monitoring requires sophisticated infrastructure. Suggesting they should artificially keep it simple for self-hosters would hold back product development.