• Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Thank you. Any reason why they wouldn’t make it more apparent from their homepage? I’m always interested in self-hosted solutions, and even I ducked out of there after seeing only subscription plans being offered.

        • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Has that killed Bitwarden yet? There are many self-hosted projects that also have paid options.

          I’d be happy with a paid (one-time fee) license for a self-hosted option with any software. Subscriptions should only be paying for data/storage, and if that’s offloaded to the customer’s local hardware, there’s no need to keep them on a subscription.

          Especially for a product that’s privacy-first, that really should include a self-hosted option (paid or otherwise).

            • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              You implied that it would hurt business, and that really doesn’t seem to be the case for other projects using a self-hosted/subscription business model.

              If you meant something else, then I guess I misunderstood. No harm, no foul.

      • pipes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        A software’s website and docs are very telling, aren’t they? It’s like a cultural thing from the creators, some open source software will always be more business oriented, others are more helpful towards homelab /self-hosting users.