We're switching to an open source model

I’d be lying if I would not address the elephant in the room first.

Of course, I decided to fork the road for StaticBackend toward an open-source future because I failed at reaching people and get the revenue out of the service.

That being said, it seems to me that releasing a developer tool such as StaticBackend in a close source way is a hard seller. I’m asking you to trust me to build your app on top of a service that claims to be free from vendor locked-in but offers a limited exit option.

From closed source to MIT license

I get it. It was a significant commitment to ask.

Having used StaticBackend myself in production for multiple applications lately, I could not resolve myself to let it go that way.

I indeed build it for my usage, but I’d also like to know if others are seeing some value.

I’ve decided to keep the managed hosting service and offer the backend completely free for self-hosting scenarios.

I’m trying to achieve with StaticBackend to have all functionalities I’m tired of writing when starting a new side project. So I figure that going the open-source way will most certainly help get there faster.

I’m the type of person that performs under pressure and would like to know if other developers find this v1 interesting. If there’s some usage of the tool I’ll be way more enthusiast about it.

When I soft-launched StaticBackend, I received significant reactions on Hacker News, but now that the backend is more accessible, I hope to discover its actual adoption trajectory.

Are you nervous someone could take it and start a closed source service?

Not at all. They’ll face the same issues I met, and not only that but, I hope to build a friendly community around this project, and this is more valuable to me at this point in my life.

In any case, I hope I’ll be able to show the value it already brings to the table and I wish this project can continue to grow with the feedback it will get.