The Business of Open Source

This week on The Business of Open Source, I spoke with Vinoth Chandar, the founder and CEO of Onehouse and the creator of Apache Hudi. We took a pretty deep dive into the relationship between Onehouse and Hudi, a topic that for me is at the heart of building a company on top of an open source project. In fact, whether or not Onehouse is an ‘open source company’ could be debatable; Hudi is an Apache project — it’s not owned by Onehouse in anyway — and Onehouse is not a ‘managed Hudi’ or ‘enterprise Hudi.’ Onehouse solves a problem that is fundamentally not the same problem that Hudi solves. Here’s some other take aways from my conversation with Vinoth: There were both technical and business reasons for the relationship between Onehouse and Hudi; Hudi is a library, and you can’t offer a library as a service. Also, Onehouse does way, way more than Hudi.Out of Hudi’s 16 project management committee members, 5 are from Onehouse. Which means both that Onehouse has a significant presence, but also that it can’t completely control the project. The disadvantage of being in a ‘hot’ market, which means there are lots of big players trying to define the narrative around data lakehouses.Starting Onehouse two and a half too late… or was it actually too early? We had a discussion about timing of starting the company, and Vinoth had arguments for why they started the company too late, but also why it might have been too early. Are you giving away too much? The Onehouse board sometimes thinks so; but what Vinoth thinks was a mistake was not spending enough time educating both Hudi users and the larger community about just how much Hudi can do, instead of letting external players define the narrative about what Hudi does. Check out the full episode for more wisdom from Vinoth! 

This week on The Business of Open Source, I spoke with Joe Duffy, co-founder and CEO of Pulumi.We kicked off the conversation by talking about why Pulumi is open source in the first place — a mix of Joe’s long-standing interest in open source and a feeling like a developer tool like Pulumi just has to be open source in order to be taken seriously. But there was another reason, too: Pulumi’s founders weren’t just in it to build a company, they wanted to transform their industry and build a lasting community, and felt like open source was the best way to do that. Lots of good take aways in this episode, like: Learning from open source legends... uh, actually, learning from Microsoft. Microsoft is an open source giant, right? It’s interesting to hear Joe talk about learning about open source business strategy from Microsoft, precisely because Microsoft does not make money directly from VSCode, and also does not invest millions of dollars into R&D just to be nice. “If you’re going to try to build a business with open source, you need to be very thoughtful and very strategic about it.” The founding team at Pulumi sort of iterated on figuring out the business model, but to a large extent they just thought about it until they had an Aha! moment. On the other hand, they didn’t go public until they thought they had a winning strategy for building an open source business. In the case of Pulumi, there’s a client side and a server side, so it made sense to build in a natural division between the two. This also made it so users were less likely to feel like Pulumi was holding back essential features in order to drive sales. “The way I always view it is the thing you’re selling has to stand on its own” Pulumi started a company, an open source project and a commercial product at the same time. Joe’s not sure he would recommend that approach, but it worked for them. “Figuring out the relationship was importnat, but actually the most important thing was to have a successful open source technology.” One thing I wanted to pull out: Even though Pulumi launched the open source project and commercial product at the same time, they focused all their efforts in the first two to three years on getting the open source project off the ground. Many founders I talk to think that once the commercial product is out there, you are forced to build a GTM team… but you don’t have to. In fact, I think the strategy of having the possibility to buy the commercial product while focusing the company’s energy on the open source software in the beginning is brilliant. Result: “We were able to create this immense funnel of inbound commercial interest, even when that wasn’t really the top level focus.” Even if you’re primarily a SaaS company, you can still offer an enterprise on-prem version for customers with hard requirements to host themselves, like air-gapped environments. Just because that option exists doesn’t mean you must build GTM motion for it, though. The business value Pulumi gets from the open source project is: generating leads, building the company’s brand, and also recruiting top-level talent. The fact that developers building the tool are so close to developers in the community is also a huge advantage. Listen to the full episode, it has a huge amount of great insights!

Tyler Jewell, CEO of Lightbend, discusses the company's transition from an open core model to the Business Source License. Facing a near-death experience in 2021, the company made crucial changes due to its churn problem. The podcast explores the challenges of changing business models, vendor alignment in cloud offerings, and the impacts of the license change on revenue and community reception.

This week on The Business of Open Source I have an episode I recorded on site at AI-Dev in Paris with Justin Cormack, CTO of Docker. We finally get around to talking about AI at the very end of the episode, but otherwise we talked business and open source and how Docker manages both. Here’s some of the take aways from the episode:There are upsides and downsides to being an open source company, and you should absolutely make sure you are leveraging the upsides. Because they don’t necessarily translate into business value automatically, you have to be intentional to make that happen. It’s often a good idea for open source businesses to create a commercial product that is complementary to their project, so that if usage of one goes up usage / adoption of the other goes up, too. This is in contrast to an open core model, where the open source project can easily end up being crippled so that people are incentivized to buy the closed source license. If you want to get to $100million ARR, you can either sell $10 subscriptions to 10 million people or you can sell $100,000 subscriptions to 1,000 people. Both get you to the same revenue number, but the business model is very different. We also talked AI and open source, given the event we were at. 

Karthik Ranganathan, Founder of Yugabyte, discusses why engineers choose databases based on intuition, not just features. They explore the importance of prioritizing simplicity vs flexibility for database users. The conversation covers the evolution of open source databases, shifting priorities in choosing databases based on workload, and the significance of open source and managed services in technology evolution.

This week on The Business of Open Source, I spoke with André Eriksson, founder and CEO at Encore. We talked about how open source develops trust, something I also discussed in the episode I recorded with Reshma Khilnani. For Encore, it’s subtly different, though. In the case of Medplum, open source is a differentiator in a market that’s used to black boxes, for Encore, open source is tablestakes in a market that won’t adopt a completely proprietary software. We talked about: Launching with a cloud platform from day one — not the open source project. On the other hand, open source is also important because often users and customers have to modify things to get it exactly right; the flexibility is a critical part of the platform’s draw. The challenge getting contributions, which André doesn’t find surprising, especially because it’s a project/product that solves problems for companies, not hobby projects. Having one brand for the open source project and the product, which can make it hard to communicate the difference between them. Ensuring that the open source project and all of the features in it are useable without being dependent on the commercial product — which is not always easy. Finding the right balance between avoiding crippleware and still having enough of a difference in value between the open source and the commercial product to sell it is a core challenge. The biggest risks from open source, which André kicked off by talking about the difference between what you perceive as a big risk and what objectively is — this is a distinction that I think is super important to understand in life and business. Ultimately he settled on a big risk just being that you build something that isn’t valuable or differentiated enough for people to pay for. Communicating the value proposition clearly is their top challenge at the moment. Check out the full episode for some serious insights into what’s working and what’s a struggle at Encore. 

This week on The Business of Open Source I spoke with Saurav Pathak, chief product officier at Bagisto, about a very different kind of business relationship with open source — and open source software incubated in a larger company. There were tons of interesting nuggets in this episode, but some things I wanted to call out are:For open source projects, the tech stack that the project is built with can in fact be a differentiating feature. This is unique to open source (and has come up before, both in my consulting work and in podcast interviews). Users might want to choose a project because it’s written in the language they are familiar with, even if the functionality is exactly the same as a competing projectThe difference in needs between the merchants (who just want to get their ecommerce store up and running) and developers building ecommerce platforms, who was worried about being able to build extensions How an open source company like Bagisto fits into the larger commercial strategy for the parent company. Build a community of developers versus building a community of merchants, and why both are important for a project like BagistoHow Saurav manages the tension between adding features that people want and not building an overly bloated product, including how to manage this tension when someone wants to contribute a feature that the core team may or may not want. It’s always interesting to me to see different models for open source companies, and Bagisto certainly is a different model. Especially after last week’s episode with Tanmai Gopal, which had a much more classic story. 

This week on The Business of Open Source I spoke with Tanmai Gopal, co-founder of Hasura. We talked about how Hasura grew out of Tanmai’s previous company, which was a consulting company. I like to call out examples of really novel open source businesses, but in fact the thing that stuck with me from the conversation with Tanmai was that Hasura is going the ‘classic’ route… and it’s working. What does the ‘classic’ route look like to me? It’s an open source project that targets individual developers and a commercial product that targets teams and teams of teams. It’s having additional network security features in the commercial options. It’s using the open source project as a growth engine and getting leads from companies that depend on it. It’s also using the open source project as a way to get feedback on the product roadmap. Here were some of the takeaways from our conversation: It’s a lot easier to sell a product if your customers see it as mission-critical. One of Hasura’s first inbound leads was from a Fortune 100 company who said they’d be unable to ship any software for two weeks if Hasura went down — and so they wanted to make sure the team behind Hasura was serious and also wanted to pay them to make sure they didn’t go down. For Hasura, the first clear difference between open source project and commercial product was that the open source project is for individual developers but the commercial product is aimed at the team level.Even for the cloud hosted edition, the product with ‘developer-level’ focus is free. In fact, if you go to the Hasura CE product page, the CTA asks you to use for free on the cloud. Tanmai said this is an intentional choice because they want to reduce friction for people to test it out, and the fastest way to get up and running will always be to use the cloud version, not the open source. We talked a lot about the control plane versus the data plane — all the editions have the same functionality at the data plane level. But the control plane, where people are collaborating — that is commercial only. The open source project can be a great way to stay close to your users / customers and use their feedback to constantly refine your product roadmap. In fact, this can be a main advantage of being open source, because it is the only way you stay close to your users and get their feedback — otherwise you would often only talk to the buyer, who is likely an exec with a big budget but not using the technology on a daily basis. This doesn’t mean open source doesn’t create liabilities for Hasura — it does, and those liabilities have to be managed. And Tanmai is frank about the fact that creating enough value on top of the open source project without crippling the growth engine is a tough balancing act. Pay attention to what your best customers are doing! That has informed some really important product decisions for Hasura — and it took them way to long to figure out the unique way their happiest customers were getting more value out of Hasura than other users. Definitely check out the full episode for more insights from Tanmai! 

Reshma Khilnani, CEO of Medplum, talks about using open source for trust, not growth in the healthcare industry. She emphasizes the importance of compliance certificates and support guarantees for customers. Reshma's passion for building software specifically for healthcare sets Medplum apart in the industry. The podcast explores the challenges and advantages of open source in healthcare development.

Adam Jacob, Founder and CEO of System Initiative, discusses the difference between being a CTO and CEO in a startup, the importance of focusing on the whole product experience, and navigating various business models in open source companies. He shares insights on total addressable markets, serviceable available market, and serviceable obtainable market, emphasizing the need to create substantial value for sustainable business growth.