A failed startup is nothing to be embarrassed about, most of us don't have the guts to try it!
You shouldn't expect much interest in the code, the value of a company's code without the business and people is quite negative when there isn't some technical secret sauce. Even if there was some technical wizardry people would just care about understanding how that one part worked and probably not use any of the code itself.
Konfig founder here, 100% agree. I wouldn't recommend anybody to actually try to decipher/deploy Konfig for their own use. I will say that one of our customers was able to deploy our docs platform for themselves while they find a way to deal with the blowout of Konfig shutting down.
>I wouldn't recommend anybody to actually try to decipher/deploy Konfig for their own use.
This is interesting. I used to work for a mortgage start-up years ago. They built several products for banks and home builders, such as a mortgage vault and tools for signing mortgage documents online.
One condition I still remember was that bank customers required us to put our code in escrow, held by lawyers, in case the company went under. I always wondered if customers could rebuild the code, allocate more resources to develop and maintain it, or simply look for an alternative solution.
they came to us for our solution. I assumed they either couldn’t build it themselves or didn’t want to invest in a custom solution.
i have been involved in quite a few code escrow agreements but none that were actually used. i'd be curious to hear any stories about cases where that did happen.
in my experience it has just been a way to help business decision makers credibly claim they are managing risk when buying from a startup
I imagine that it is for either insurance or regulatory reasons. Someone upstream is nervous about the bank relying on a startup for its core infrastructure, and is only placated by knowing that the code is in escrow. They're not themselves programmers and don't know how useless the code would be without the institutional knowledge of the startup.
True, having had a few increasingly less unsuccessful startups, a thing I learned the hard way is that:
1) You should not build a tech startup unless you have either a business plan for getting revenue quickly or shit ton of investment. And you won't typically get investment unless you have at least some notion of where the business is going to be. I've made this mistake. Techies mostly don't understand the business side well enough for this to work.
2) Most companies aren't startups. They are just companies. With revenue. That pay the bills. A startup is a company without revenue that is living on borrowed time and money. Especially if that's your own money, you need a plan for this.
3) VC funded companies mostly fail. A VC's business is to ensure that those companies that are going to fail, fail quickly. They fund their VC business with the handful of companies that don't fail and succeed spectacularly. So, getting "accelerated" or "funded" doesn't mean that you are on a path to success. It actually means you are on the spot to beat the odds and that you don't have a lot of time left. Chances are that you will fail quickly.
4) If you are a successful company with revenue, you don't need VCs. So you should question why you are talking to them at all? Are you struggling to make revenue? A VC won't fix that.
5) A lot of VCs are lazy and don't get interested until you are already successful. There is a weird dynamic here where companies get funded early and then fail. Or don't get funded and then succeed.
My current company is four years into being completely bootstrapped. As in we struggle with revenue and we put in our time when able. I mostly live off consultancy that I do on the side. The company just had its third most successful year in a row and is getting close to where I should be able to retire as a consultant soonish and focus on the business instead. But it's been a long journey.
As for open source. I open source anything that is not business specific or part of our core IP. One good reason for this is that I hate rebuilding the same crap when I start my next company. I've been through this and that kind of stuff just slows you down. People obsess about intellectual property in startups. The reality is that most software is not that valuable. But you still need to spend time, money, and energy building it.
So, I contribute a lot of tools, frameworks and what not of which I am the main user. Just so I can continue to use that stuff on the next project.
You shouldn't expect much interest in the code, the value of a company's code without the business and people is quite negative when there isn't some technical secret sauce. Even if there was some technical wizardry people would just care about understanding how that one part worked and probably not use any of the code itself.