I use Vagrant every single day and am not sure how I feel about this news. On one hand, I’m very excited that Mitchell will be able to spend his full time hacking and improving Vagrant. While I’m fine with Vagrant’s VirtualBox dependency, many people inside my company would love to use VMWare Fusion.
However, I’m concerned that he decided to base his company on Vagrant. Unlike antirez’s agreement with VMWare, Mitchell will have to derive revenue from Vagrant. What if the paid support / training doesn’t work? Will he be forced to release more code as paid add-ons instead of open source?
I hope that HashiCorp is very successfully, because I depend on Vagrant would hate to see the open-source version become crippled.
While I can’t tell the future, I can perhaps make you feel a bit better:
Due to the project’s licensing, if HashiCorp fails, then nothing really changes. Things just go back to the way they were before. With that said, I’m not raising any money, but I have enough saved up and I have enough open contracting bids that I personally should be fine for quite awhile. So I have “quite awhile” to make money.
As I said in the blog post, none of the add-ons will be required to run Vagrant. I have zero intention of making Vagrant cost anything for its usage today.
If I sway from this track, I expect the community will let me know.
Thanks for the reply Mitchell. I hope my post didn’t come across as too negative. Vagrant has become a part of my daily workflow, so I’m really pulling for HashiCorp to succeed. Best of luck, and I can’t wait for the next version of Vagrant.
On the product development front, the separation of Vagrant from VirtualBox will be a reality soon.
Thank the fucking LORD! Although I just figured how to properly make VMs out of the Windows VHDs for IE development… :)