A new solution to Open Source sustainability using git

GitRoyalty doesn't rely on complex licenses, support promises, issue bounties, or donations to pay open source developers. Instead it uses the power of git to add a paywall to open source projects, putting money in contributors' pockets for the first time.
Would you recommend this product?
16 Reviews2.8/5
Kinda misses the point of open-source IMO. Would prefer to use something like buymecoffee, patreon or opencollective.
Hey @dima_grossman! GitRoyalty upholds the very principles that open source is built on. Anyone anywhere in the world can inspect and contribute to your project, and your licensing can remain permissive. The only difference with GitRoyalty is that consumers are met with a paywall when they want to use your project in their own, usually profitable, product. GitRoyalty hopes to create an ecosystem where consumers are incentivized to pay developers, and developers can sustain the continued improvement and maintenance of their open source projects. Donation services like Patreon and Open Collective have come up short for the majority of open source contributors in this regard. Usually only popular repository owners are the ones people donate to, when the reality is that there are hundreds or thousands of other developers that contribute to the code you use. GitRoyalty ensures each and every contributor gets paid, not just the famous user facing ones.
oh woah, this is a really interesting project! At first, not gonna lie, was a little heistant thinking about all my favorite OSS projects moving over to a paywall, but seeing some of the example prices makes me realize I can still afford to use them while also supporting the developers. Super excited to see how this progresses & see the adoption rate. Good job, and good luck! :^)
@stuffbyspencer I'm so glad you feel that way! Something else to consider is processing fees - GitRoyalty charges all your subscriptions as a single transaction. So the more repositories you subscribe to the less fees have to be paid per repository, putting more money in contributors' pockets. This makes low prices more sensible since most developers use hundreds of open source projects.
@sdrzn right, that makes total sense! Plenty of OSS projects have thousands of users. If just half of them paid less than a dollar a month, that could really be a decent income to continue supporting the project!
This goes against what open source is. Not everything should be money. Open Source is about sharing, trust, not money.
@misir Hey Misir, you're exactly right that Open Source is about sharing and trusting others with your code. GitRoyalty doesn't get in the way of that, in fact the only thing our paywall hides is a single metadata file (e.g. package.json) that makes it hard to consume an open source package in a production environment without. And it's always up to a project owner whether or not they want money involved in the dynamic of their open source work–GitRoyalty just gives those that do want it an option that's never existed before.
@sdrzn I think you should make some changes on your service. Eg.: manifest locking feature could be optional. I want to use your service to get donations. But don't want to limit access to the repo for people who have not donated. Or you could add premium support feature that only paid users could contact maintainers.
Hey Product Hunt! I'm so excited to release GitRoyalty, the world's first paid open source platform. Read more about the backstory here: