Open source projects like Kubernetes transformed the software industry with the help of cooperative communities like the CNCF and the ability to share information quickly. Open source has also made it easier to launch products and gain market share with vendor-driven open source software (OSS) projects, kind of like a premium or PLG sales go-to-market (GTM) model.
However, years of SaaS innovation and disruption have threatened the profitability of vendor-driven open source projects, forcing several major players to shift away from the open source licensing that their companies were founded on. These changes have not only upset the user community but have also caused some people to wonder about the future of OSS. However, there are key differences between the projects that have recently changed their license to be more restrictive and projects supported by communities like the CNCF.
Vendor-Driven Versus Community-Led OSS
How involved and influential is the user community compared to the main or original vendor? This is one way to classify open source projects. Open source projects driven by the community are those where the community of users has the lead role in creating, updating, supporting and securing the software. Some examples are Kubernetes, Linux, Apache and CNCF projects. These projects usually use permissive licenses, such as GPL, Apache or MIT, that let users change, share and use the software for any reason without imposing limits or requirements. These projects also follow the cloud-native principles of scalability, portability, resilience and automation. Open source projects that are driven by vendors are those where one vendor or a few vendors provide most of the software and maintenance. At the same time, the community of users may add some modifications, support and patches. The primary motivation behind these projects is to monetize them. Some examples of open source projects that are driven by vendors are MongoDB, Elastic, Redis Labs and HashiCorp. These projects often use licenses that are more limiting or conditional, such as AGPL, SSPL or BSL, that restrict the use of the software in some situations, such as offering it as a service, or requiring users to pay fees or share changes. These projects may also have features or services that are proprietary or not available in the open source version or that are customized for specific cloud platforms or environments.
SaaS Influence on Open Source Projects
The advent of cheap and ubiquitous cloud computing resources and fast broadband connections has transformed the way software is delivered and consumed. Software-as-a-service (SaaS) has become a dominant model for many applications, offering users convenience, scalability and cost savings. However, SaaS also poses a challenge for some vendor-driven open source projects, as it enables cloud providers and other competitors to offer the same or similar software as a service without contributing back to the original vendor or the original project. This reduces the revenue potential and the incentive for the vendor to continue investing in the open source project.
In response to the challenges posed by cloud computing, some vendor-driven open source projects have changed their licenses or their GTM models. For example, MongoDB, Elastic, Confluent, Redis Labs and HashiCorp have adopted new licenses that restrict the use of their software-as-a-service by third parties or require them to pay fees or share their modifications. These changes are intended to protect the revenue and sustainability of the original vendors and to ensure that they can continue to invest in the open source project. However, these changes have also caused some controversy and backlash from the user community, who may feel that the project is becoming less open and more proprietary or that they are losing some of the benefits and freedoms of open source.
However, community-driven open source projects have largely maintained their permissive licenses and their collaborative approach. These projects still benefit from the diversity and scale of their user community, who contribute to the development, maintenance, support and security of the software. These projects also leverage the support of organizations and foundations, such as the Linux Foundation, the Apache Software Foundation and the CNCF, who provide governance, funding and infrastructure. These projects may also offer premium features or services, such as certifications, training or consulting, to generate revenue and sustain the open source project.
Summary
There are many different types of projects, licenses, communities and business models at play. While some vendor-driven open source projects have faced challenges covering development costs and have changed their licenses to be more restrictive, community-driven projects have largely maintained their permissive licenses and collaborative approach because the incentives behind these projects aren’t driven by profit. Open source is and will remain a vital and valuable component of the technology industry, enabling innovation, collaboration and interoperability.
To hear more about cloud-native topics, join the Cloud Native Computing Foundation, Techstrong Group and the entire cloud-native community in Paris, France at KubeCon+CloudNativeCon EU 2024 – March 19-22, 2024.