Just curious, which features did you want that were proprietary at the time?
The primary reasons for including certain features in Write.as but not in WriteFreely are when they're very early (it's easier to deploy and fix on a single hosted service), or when they involve a ton of external dependencies. My thinking on the latter is that I'd rather leave a feature out than leave admins with a poor experience, vendor lock-in, lacking documentation, etc. But maybe that's the wrong way to think about it.
Either way, "locking features off" isn't a business strategy here, but just a matter of practicality as a very small open source project. As I mentioned elsewhere, we plan to bring things into parity for v1.0. And we very much welcome contributors -- even if it's just reviewing pull requests!
It was a while ago but the ones I remember were email subscriptions, custom javascript, and custom instance support in the iOS app.
Thank You for clarifying the reasoning. That does make more sense and makes it more justified. I still think it would be better to at least have the write.as fork be open source even if you can’t ensure stability/any sort of support.
The primary reasons for including certain features in Write.as but not in WriteFreely are when they're very early (it's easier to deploy and fix on a single hosted service), or when they involve a ton of external dependencies. My thinking on the latter is that I'd rather leave a feature out than leave admins with a poor experience, vendor lock-in, lacking documentation, etc. But maybe that's the wrong way to think about it.
Either way, "locking features off" isn't a business strategy here, but just a matter of practicality as a very small open source project. As I mentioned elsewhere, we plan to bring things into parity for v1.0. And we very much welcome contributors -- even if it's just reviewing pull requests!