Readit News logoReadit News
Posted by u/amadeoeoeo 2 months ago
Ask HN: Startup shutting down, should we open source?
After 5 years of building and fighting for our startup, we’ve reached the end — the product will be shut down soon. I won’t mention names to keep this from sounding promotional. Let’s just say it’s a kind of website builder.

We’ve tried (unsuccessfully) to sell the codebase. Meanwhile, some of our most loyal users are now asking us to open source it. Part of me feels this would be a meaningful way to give back and ensure the project doesn’t completely disappear.

However, I can also foresee a lot of technical and legal complications, not to mention potential maintenance burdens.

Has anyone here been through this before? Any lessons, regrets, or advice?

Thanks a lot in advance!

(AI used to improve spelling)

toast0 · 2 months ago
> However, I can also foresee a lot of technical and legal complications, not to mention potential maintenance burdens.

Shouldn't have a maintenance burden. That burden will be extinguished with the corporation.

If I were you, I'd put it on github with a corporate account, leave a readme that it's abandoned and then mark the repo read-only.

Let (interested) customers know and encourage them to fork it. Disable issues and pull requests before you publish.

Alternatively, put a source dump on your website, and let people know they can put it on Github, but you're not doing it. If nobody republishes it before the corporate site goes down, it is what it is.

brudgers · 2 months ago
What you say makes sense if there actually is a corporate shield.

Because “startup” is often used in a weak sense only to mean “new business,” there may not be corporate protections for the beneficial owners of this startup.

If it is a Silicon Valley style startup, then the founders probably ought to talk to their investors because that relationship matters and the investors probably know something about open sourcing code bases from shut downs.

sexyman48 · 2 months ago
I wouldn't do it. It'd be like a dead lover. Don't get suckered into prettying up her corpse on the off chance your opinion of necrophilia changes.
authorfly · 2 months ago
100%.

Dealing with 5 year old code is okay now. In 10 years it will cause you pain. It's like going back to an ex after you lose attraction. It never works out and hurts both parties (in this case your users, because you won't maintain it or want to pretty soon)

HenryBemis · 2 months ago
And or if you got any dependencies (even to "open" 'stuff') when vulnerabilities and bugs arise that will break the backwards compatibility to your codebase you will definitely be tempted/lured/asked to spend "only 5 mins" to update it.

Just don't. Keep a copy wherever others suggested, keep a photo in the folder with the ex-bf/gf think about it every few years (I wonder how she is doing - in a Morty voice) and quickly move on!

bravesoul2 · 2 months ago
Whoa... wasn't expecting that as a reply
amadeoeoeo · 2 months ago
lol. To be clear I like her the way she is... It did not work financially but I believe it is a neat piece of code. I keep "using it" myself regularly ;)
dataf3l · 2 months ago
I believe the Haiku people open sourced after their company was down, I saw it as an act of good faith towards the people who trusted them, I say try open sourcing it, who knows what the future holds...
throwawayffffas · 2 months ago
Open source but make it clear that the project will not receive any updates. If any of your clients want to pick it up they will be able to fork it.

> Legal complications

If your code was written by you and you are not infringing on any patents and you don't have any client data in your repos, you should be fine I guess, but I am not a lawyer.

Just make it MIT and open it to the public. Make sure there are no keys or credentials in the repos either.

amadeoeoeo · 2 months ago
Thanks for the advice. One fear I have is about security. Is the code is exposed, it will be way easier to exploit potential security flaws... I will not be able to just do nothing if this is the case .. Ill end up wanting it.
throwawayffffas · 2 months ago
> It will be way easier to exploit potential security flaws.

It will be also easier for other people to find them and report or fix them.

In general it's a bad plan to rely on code secrecy for security. It's security through obscurity which never works out. All the cryptography schemes and algorithms are public. Most of the public internet runs on open source code. Transparency is a strength, not a weakness.

ezekg · 2 months ago
What's to exploit? The company won't exist anymore...

Deleted Comment

onel · 2 months ago
I would recommend you make it open source. I've also done this the past as well. Even if it's a project that is not maintained you don't know how it might help someone else.
Flundstrom2 · 2 months ago
I would suggest putting it out as open source with a permissive license that don't require upstream commitment.

Because you don't want to become a maintainer. Just make it clear that it is provided as-is, without support.

It does after all represent a lot of value having been poured into it, worthy of a better ending than rm -rf, even if it didn't reach break-even.

tukantje · 2 months ago
This really depends on what field the product is in.

In my opinion; if you can't sell it you could also try to hand it over to another company / third party. Finding someone to take over a project takes a bit of time but it'd allow for it to survive.

However you need legal advice, fast. First talk to a lawyer who understands this.

leakycap · 2 months ago
If you don't open source it, it will either wither and be abandoned or someone clever will "open source it" for you in a way you may not like.

Software is hard to kill. See Softpress Freeway as an example in the same industry.

amadeoeoeo · 2 months ago
Hey, I do not quite understand your statement. How should this happen? Ex Devs? Hacking my git account? Or do you mean something else?
leakycap · 2 months ago
Something else: I support some long term clients still using some 1990s software that I've ported to run within a VM on modern hardware. I ended up using developer tools made in the 2000s to decompile the executable and make changes to the software, others have done so and posted their own version. These tools were not available when the developer walked away, so they probably never envisioned these changes.

With AI and other tools developing rapidly, I wouldn't be surprised if someone was able to do things with your code in ways you didn't expect, even if you choose not to open source it yourself.