Campsite is not open source. From the LICENSE file on the repo [0]:<p>> Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International<p>[0] <a href="https://github.com/campsite/campsite/blob/dae5db8611e8adc0571777c9272ab6165eea8f76/LICENSE">https://github.com/campsite/campsite/blob/dae5db8611e8adc057...</a>
So Campsite got acqui-hired by Notion, tells their customers in a blog [1] something along the lines: "Thanks for all the fish, you've got 2 months to migrate to something else.".<p>They could have open sourced it in a way which would have allowed customers to atleast maintain their own install. But instead they release it under a license which says "non-commercial". So even if you were to export your own data you can't even self-host it.<p>It seems to me rug pulls such as these are bad for the entire industry. Why would you invest in these kind of products if there is real chance you'll get rug-pulled?<p>[1] <a href="https://www.campsite.com/blog/campsite-winding-down" rel="nofollow">https://www.campsite.com/blog/campsite-winding-down</a>
How exactly do you use what looks like work-planning software non-commerically?<p>As for the license, it's their code and they can release it under whatever license they want, but they obviously shouldn't call it open source. Usually companies do this sort of thing to take advantage FOSS's reputation, but in this case it just looks like ignorance to me.
Campsite team, if you happen to be reading this: consider whether a more permissive license still meeting the FOSS definition, like GPL or AGPL, would better fit your needs.
GPL means that anyone who modifies the source code, or integrates it into a larger work, has to release the modified version.<p>So this would ensure that everyone’s contributions continue to help the wider community. As a side effect, it would also prevent anyone from using your work without releasing the source code for their project or product, benefitting open source as a whole.<p>The choice is obviously ultimately yours. I personally didn’t realize the benefits of GPL until recently.
Every README should explain what the software actually is. "an open source version of the Campsite app" tells me absolute nothing — what IS the Campsite app? I would have submitted a PR with a fix, but the README also states they wouldn't accept such a PR anyway.
People complaining about the license are missing this - <a href="https://www.notion.com/blog/welcoming-campsites-founders-to-the-notion-team" rel="nofollow">https://www.notion.com/blog/welcoming-campsites-founders-to-...</a><p>Notion bought the company. They have no reason to want the product to actually be open source, because they'd just be helping a potential competitor.
The license can be discussed here<p><a href="https://github.com/campsite/campsite/issues/15">https://github.com/campsite/campsite/issues/15</a>
Hah, more license confusion! It is a good learning resource for those wanting to see how such a codebase works. I do think they should have opened the repository as read-only and that may align more with the educational intent.<p>"We will only consider pull requests and issues regarding self-hosting or critical fixes. "<p>Having this makes the messaging a bit confusing. You will accept improvements and bug fixes which we can use commercially but you can't - Did I read that right?
I understand the concern with calling something licensed with CC BY-NC “open source”, but I’m very interested in reading the complete source of a modern comercial app.<p>It’s rare that we get to see the complete picture of something that has many paying customers like this, and I’m thankful for the Campsite team for sharing it.
They went from Show HN to bust in 5 months: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41182414">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41182414</a><p>I really wonder how that happened. Was there like no traction whatsoever? 5 months doesn't seem like an awfully long amount of time to give a product a chance.
I hadn't come across this yet, interesting idea, and something I had wished for in the past. Ultimately I realized google groups already is something you can easily use - the bigger (social) problem is that not everyone is comfortable with text communication.
I'm glad the founders have found a way out. This is key when launching a product that never really took off. However, I never understood why this product existed in the first place. I'll probably get downvoted to oblivion, but to me, it represents exactly the type of software people from Silicon Valley would release: products disconnected from the needs of real companies, not the fancy unicorns. This is represented by this sentence on the marketing website: "The new standard for...". For future companies: before claiming to be the new standard, please be the new standard in the first place.<p>That being said, for educational purposes, making the code publicly available is a nice gesture and I see a lot of values. I wish more companies would do that so the industry as a whole learn from the talents of others - because yes, these people are incredibly talented.