Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Official Plugin Store #808

Closed
angrybrad opened this issue Jan 31, 2017 · 95 comments
Closed

Official Plugin Store #808

angrybrad opened this issue Jan 31, 2017 · 95 comments
Assignees

Comments

@angrybrad
Copy link
Member

Created by: Selvin Ortiz (selvin@selvin.co) on 2015/03/10 20:43:19 +0000
Votes at time of UserVoice import: 224


Plugin development and the Craft community as a whole would benefit greatly from an officially supported plugin store.

The plugin store would allow us developers to more easily sell/distribute our plugins and more quickly provide bugfixes and updates as well as enable our customers/users to have a single place to manage plugin licenses, request plugin specific support, and possibly have access to plugin docs right within the control panel.

Granted the plugin store is built into the control panel and provides a feature set similar to the one that has been discussed in back channels. Most of which is not public knowledge at this point.

Having websites like straightupcraft.com to discover new plugins and craftpl.us to sell/distribute commercial plugins is a descent start but I feel that an officially supported plugin store built into the control panel would benefit us far beyond the immediate problems it solves and would allow us to be better organized and to be more closely aligned with what a modern CMS should be.

Though some people have said that there are other priorities that should take precedence, I believe that the plugin store should be at the top of the list because formalizing this process would most likely motivate other agencies to invest in Craft plugin development and hopefully we can get some big guns to actually fill the gap that freelances have been unable to fill for so long and finally have fully featured commercial tools for draft/review/approval workflows and calendar/event implementations as well as robust e-commerce solutions we can deploy and that take advantage of Crafts localization, element type API, etc.

Without a formal process, we're going to continue to have quantity in plugins but not as much in the way of quality, continued development, and adequate support.

A plugin store, in my humble opinion, should be high priority on the list.

@angrybrad
Copy link
Member Author

Posted by Christian (seelbach@gmx.de) on 2015/03/09 00:49:13 +0000


It would be nice if the plugin store would allow donations or “pay what you want” licences.

With some kind of indication in the settings / plugins view that reminds the users that they’ve done good (a small Happy Developer badge or something like this).

I think this would be a nice way to support developers who

  • want as many people as possible use the plugin (do something good for the Craft platform and community)
  • offer a plugin that make the developer’s life easier (hard sell because the client has no direct benefits from it)
  • offer a small utility/helper plugin (e.g. stop developers abusing Twig)

All these plugins do still require maintenance and support, and I’m quite confident that there’s quite a few developers and client’s who are willing do give something.

@angrybrad
Copy link
Member Author

Posted by Matt Wilcox (mail@matthewwilcox.com) on 2015/03/10 18:54:52 +0000


I would deeple appreciate plugins being rolled into the Craft update system; because as joyful as one-click updates of Craft core is - it is a ball-ache having to manually update plugins every time. It'd also be useful to know beforehand, on one page, if certain plugins are compatible with a pending Craft update yet.

@angrybrad
Copy link
Member Author

Posted by Florian (fw@demodern.de) on 2015/03/13 06:38:29 +0000


it does indeed. Expected it a tad earlier as well. Better save then sorry. In P&T we trust :)

@angrybrad
Copy link
Member Author

Posted by Julian Kovalsky (julzmon@gmail.com) on 2015/03/19 18:25:13 +0000


Woo hoo. A year from now seems so far.

@angrybrad
Copy link
Member Author

Posted by Nate Iler (nate@flipboxdigital.com) on 2015/03/11 14:29:14 +0000


With the announcement of the Plugin Store being added to Craft 3, I'd like to voice some features while it's early.

  1. Licensing: Inherit similar functionality to the Craft licensing...trying to mitigate someone buying one plugin and using it across multiple installs.

  2. Recurring/Renewal: Ability for developers to collect recurring (terms unknown) or renewal (terms unknown) capabilities. Help developers support their plugins and add new features.

  3. Testing: Establishing some min standards for plugins getting added to the store. Code coverage / pass tests / etc.

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

brandonkelly commented May 11, 2017

Some things we can share, now that development is underway:

  • We will be dropping support for manually-installed plugins via the plugins/ folder. All plugins will have to be installed via Composer (though it will be possible to install/update plugins from the Control Panel for the terminal-averse).
    • Therefore all publicly distributable plugins must be available from public GitHub repos (whether OS or commercial/proprietary), and registered with Packagist. (For private/internal plugins, see my comment below.)
  • Plugin Store license validation will work similar to Craft CMS / Commerce – all plugins can be installed for free on non-public domains indefinitely as a trial; license validation only kicks in for public domains.
  • License validation only works for plugins that are sold exclusively through the Store, since Craft can’t be sure if a plugin is legit if there’s a chance it was purchased elsewhere.
  • Subscription-only pricing tiers (no one-time pricing) at a range of fixed price points (starting at ~$49/year). Tier options are:
    • 1 license ($X/year)
    • 2-5 licenses (~$1.5X/year)
    • 6-25 licenses (~$2.5X/year)
  • We will take a 20% transaction fee, which includes CC processing fees, which will get reinvested back into the Store
  • We are considering $100/year developer fee, as a way to keep cruft out of the Store.

Things that won’t be there at launch but worth considering down the road:

  • User ratings/reviews
  • Sales
  • Bundles
  • Plugin/developer certification

cc @nateiler @selvinortiz

@tjdraper
Copy link

I just want to make sure I’m getting my head around this correctly:

  • No one license per domain pricing? Only subscriptions can be purchased through the store?
  • Plugins that do not wish to participate in subscription pricing much be available publicly in a GitHub repo so they can be installed through composer (and only composer)?

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

No one license per domain pricing?

If you only need one license, then yes you can start with that. But as soon as you need two licenses, you can upgrade to the 2-5 license subscription tier, for roughly 50% more. Same goes for the 6-25 tier. If you need more than 25, you’d start over with a second subscription, etc.

Worth noting that in practice, the 2+ tiers only apply to devs/agencies that tend to manage licenses on their clients’ behalves. If your clients are the ones owning the licenses, they will just have their own single-install licenses.

Only subscriptions can be purchased through the store?

Correct. Our stance is that one-time pricing just doesn't make sense for web software, especially CMS plugins. Even relatively simple plugins that are “feature-complete” are never actually “finished”, given all the moving parts, between bug reports, security vulnerabilities, browser and CMS platform changes, etc.—and that’s not even touching on normal support or feature updates! So one-time pricing just ends up being unsustainable in the long run.

Plugins that do not wish to participate in subscription pricing much be available publicly in a GitHub repo so they can be installed through composer (and only composer)?

To be clear, all Craft 3 plugins will be Composer-installed, commercial or otherwise. We are going to completely remove support for manually installing plugins in the plugins/ folder, for a variety of reasons. The Plugin Store will provide a way to install plugins without going into the terminal (probably even for plugins that aren’t in the Store), but it will still be Composer under the hood.

@wbrowar
Copy link

wbrowar commented May 11, 2017

@brandonkelly Thanks for sharing this info early on. Here are a couple more questions:

Therefore all plugins must be available from public GitHub repos (whether OS or commercial/proprietary), and registered with Packagist

  • There are times—like when integrating with Third-party systems—where we'll need to write a plugin specific to one project's needs to use PHP functionality that's not available in Twig. Forgive me as I'm not super familiar with Composer and Packagist, but does this mean that we'd have to put that plugin up on it's own public repo in order to use it in our project? If that were the case I'd have a concern that we'd have to expose code that we're otherwise prefer to put in a private repo, just to use PHP in our sites.

  • Does subscription pricing mean that you'd pay annually (or whatever the term will be) to maintain the license to use the plugin (if so, what happens when the subscription lapses)? Or does it mean that if you decide to stop paying the subscription, you'll be able to keep the plugin on your site, but no longer be able to get support/download updates?

Thanks!
Will

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

does this mean that we'd have to put that plugin up on it's own public repo in order to use it in our project?

Great question, @wbrowar. There are 2 ways you can avoid putting your plugins on public repos:

  1. Define a path repository in your project’s composer.json that points Composer to a local Composer package for your plugin. Composer will symlink it into your project, rather than attempting to fetch it from Packagist. (We explain how to do this in the plugin docs.)
  2. Use Private Packagist – basically Packagist for private repos (not free).

Also worth noting, in Craft 3 you don’t actually need to make a plugin for project-specific code. We have to document this, but I touched on it a bit at the Craft 3 Plugin Dev workshop at Peers. See slide 45 of https://speakerdeck.com/brandonkelly/craft-3-plugin-development for the gist.

Does subscription pricing mean that you'd pay annually (or whatever the term will be) to maintain the license to use the plugin (if so, what happens when the subscription lapses)? Or does it mean that if you decide to stop paying the subscription, you'll be able to keep the plugin on your site, but no longer be able to get support/download updates?

The former, as we wouldn’t be able to halt updates even if we wanted to. If a subscription lapses, everything will continue to work, but a nag alert will appear at the top of the Control Panel prompting users to renew the subscription or uninstall (similar to what happens if you try running Craft Pro with a Personal license on a public domain).

@wbrowar
Copy link

wbrowar commented May 11, 2017

Thanks for the clarification, @brandonkelly! Really looking forward to seeing this come together.

@davidhellmann
Copy link
Contributor

What is with Private / Portfolio Sites. I've no Problem for Client Projects or Agency Projects but as a Developer with my own site and some little Sideprojects it is maybe a bit cumbersome to spend hundrets of doller to use plugins and play with it. Maybe a Pricing Model close to the Craft License Model would be fine. Like: Personal / Client / Pro with different Pricings for the Plugins,. Maybe also free for private. I'm 100% with the Plugin Devs that they get their money but the money should come from client projects where is the money and not from the personal devs / desginer the are happy to go with craft.

But just my two cents.

@steverowling
Copy link
Contributor

@brandonkelly Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this.

Thinking through a scenario, I wondered how it might work in practice.

Assume I buy Plugin A through the store in January and pay the 1x subscription tier. A couple of months later in March I buy the plugin again for a different site and now I'm on the 2-5 subscription tier. When is my renewal payable at this level? January or March?

If each plugin purchase subscription lasts for 1 year, but multiple copies are purchased over 12 months, how are these grouped together and how is the renewal date calculated?

Or would I need to commit to a particular subscription tier for a year when I first purchase a plugin, which then allows me to install it on up to as many sites as the licence tier covers within a 12 month period?

@narration-sd
Copy link
Contributor

@davidhellmann I think your point is covered in Brandon's first statement, happily?:

Plugin Store license validation will work similar to Craft CMS / Commerce – all plugins can be installed for free on non-public domains indefinitely as a trial; license validation only kicks in for public domains

@brandonkelly went after your Speakernotes to see non-plugin extension --- that's the best set of speech notes I think I've ever seen. I kind of knew most of it anyway by now, but has its impact...!

Cheers both

@carlcs
Copy link
Contributor

carlcs commented May 11, 2017

@narration-sd using a plugin on a non-public domain (trial usage) is not the same as using it for free on personal sites (similar to Craft Personal license).

@davidhellmann
Copy link
Contributor

@narration-sd

I think your point is covered in Brandon's first statement, happily?:
That sound more like in dev enviroments not on my wish :)

@narration-sd
Copy link
Contributor

narration-sd commented May 11, 2017

@carlcs You're right -- I missed that distinction, this time of night. Ditto @davidhellmann

Maybe @brandonkelly can have a thought for this. It's how I presumed it would work also....though it's true Craft sites nor presently licensed plugins don't...

I should go to bed, but now I'm not sure myself that the proposed way isn't the wisest.

David, where did you enjoy this privilege before -- and wasn't that given by a plugin developer like Squarebit, who could do that also for an unlicensed version off their own site in Craft 3? The discomfort of Composer install might tend to see it was used as intended.

Definitely needs more thought, as to what even we want, and quite possibly @takobell and @brandonkelly already have gone well through it.

@mmikkel
Copy link
Contributor

mmikkel commented May 11, 2017

Correct. Our stance is that one-time pricing just doesn't make sense for web software, especially CMS plugins.

@brandonkelly What about CMS'es? Are you moving Craft to a subscription based model?

@dennisfrank
Copy link
Contributor

dennisfrank commented May 11, 2017

@brandonkelly Thanks for sharing. It’s great how much you care on how to maintain a healthy and rewarding plugin ecosystem. I hope you can answer a few questions and comments.

  1. Could you explain the tiers? What does “2-5 licenses (~$1.5X/year)” mean? For 2-5 licences each licence costs 1.5x or up to 5 licences cost 1.5x all together?

  2. I am also interested in your thoughts on bundling plugin licences to Craft Personal/Client/Pro licences. I plan to use Craft for personal or non-commercial sites too (e. g. a site for a friend’s band). A yearly licence fee could be a deal breaker for those kind of sites.

  3. I would prefer a Sketch-like licence renewals:

When you purchase Sketch for the first time, you can use it for as long as you want—but you’ll only receive free updates for a year from your date of purchase. If you find that your license has expired after that year don’t worry, you can continue to use Sketch on your last-updated version. You will not be eligible to download any further updates without first renewing your license.

A license model like that would encourage plugin developers to maintain and update plugins regularly. They could bind custom support to paid licences as well.

Any thoughts on this?

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

Maybe a Pricing Model close to the Craft License Model would be fine. Like: Personal / Client / Pro with different Pricings for the Plugins,. Maybe also free for private.

We could consider adding something like a “Free for personal use” option that plugin devs can opt into. /@davidhellmann

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

brandonkelly commented May 11, 2017

Assume I buy Plugin A through the store in January and pay the 1x subscription tier. A couple of months later in March I buy the plugin again for a different site and now I'm on the 2-5 subscription tier. When is my renewal payable at this level? January or March?

Good question @steverowling. If you wish to upgrade a subscription to a higher tier, we will probably just discount it by some % of what you paid for the lower plan. So if you’re 1/4 into a single-license subscription for $100, and the 2-5-license subscription is normally $150, it will only cost you $75 for that first year (150 - (100 * .75)). Essentially we would be giving you a refund for however much of the lower tier plan you didn’t end up using, and then starting you fresh with the new higher tier plan. Your renewal date going forward would be March.

@narration-sd
Copy link
Contributor

narration-sd commented May 11, 2017

Well, think to weigh in one more time here, especially after considering on comments of others, showing up on Slack.

I guess I'd really like to suggest a separate (and not competing in concept with the store) tier -- a simple one.

Why. Well, continuity of situations developers, and as they grow, is at the root of it -- that and protecting ability the for small and not so profitable projects you guys have always been so well in support of..

People have to start somewhere, and that is not often as a full-service agency prepared to advertise, promote, create constant innovation, and so forth, as would be the justification from the customer's side to purchase subscription plugins.

I also still remember the original considerations about the store, how to assure its quality levels, etc., and those are important, with the present plan an intelligent route-around for any number of those issues. I was impressed.

How about this, then?

  • the store just as you propose it, for the 'substantial for agencies' types of offerings
  • the same delivery mechanism only, offered to be freely used -- unadvertised, unsupported except for the mechanism itself, which will be paid for by the premium subscriber path as you plan.

With that second, quiet part, now the new, the free-for-certain-uses, the self-sold, and the single-payment of any kind plugins all have a solid basis in Craft, which can easily remain not very visible.

The premium products and the store's value on the other hand shine, for anyone who goes to that stage, and are paid for their qualities.

It's worth considering, would think, that you'd also save on support costs occuring, for persons who would otherwise attempt to configure plugins via Composer raw etc. -- the kind of case that's rising as you see already for other areas, even PHP installs, as Craft's appeal broadens.

Always these things are a great balance to discover, and I often respect just how good you guys are at at that, so you know the way this is simply a suggestion, @takobell and @brandonkelly.

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

brandonkelly commented May 11, 2017

Could you explain the tiers? What does “2-5 licenses (~$1.5X/year)” mean? For 2-5 licences each licence costs 1.5x or up to 5 licences cost 1.5x all together?

The latter. For a little context, we’re basing this off a popular model in WordPress’ plugin ecosystem, which seems to work really well for plugin devs.

Our top priority with the Store is to make Craft plugin development a sustainable business, so devs are encouraged to stand by their plugins and customers for years to come, and we think taking a firm stance on this model is our best chance at achieving that.

I am also interested in your thoughts on bundling plugin licences to Craft Personal/Client/Pro licences. I plan to use Craft for personal or non-commercial sites too (e. g. a site for a friend’s band). A yearly licence fee could be a deal breaker for those kind of sites.

I don’t see this being a huge issue, especially if you’re on a 2+ license sub and are able to charge the client a discounted rate on it, but we’ll see how it plays out :)

I would prefer a Sketch-like licence renewals:

I agree it seems like that would be a good option on the surface. But there’s two issues:

  1. Even if we wanted to go with that model, the Plugin Store doesn’t control updates (Composer does) so it can’t put a stop to them if the subscription ends, and we aren’t handling plugin support (the plugin developers do), so we can’t put a stop to that either.

  2. There are more moving parts with CMS plugins than a desktop app (browser/CMS platform updates, compatibility with other plugins), and they are at a much higher risk for security vulnerabilities, so the idea that you can buy a plugin and “use it for as long as you want” without ever updating it just isn’t realistic.

/cc @dennisfrank

@wbrowar
Copy link

wbrowar commented May 11, 2017

Maybe a Pricing Model close to the Craft License Model would be fine. Like: Personal / Client / Pro with different Pricings for the Plugins,. Maybe also free for private.
We could consider adding something like a “Free for personal use” option that plugin devs can opt into.

@brandonkelly I think this is what you're saying, but here's a bit more elaboration on my thoughts on this:

It puts a bit more work on Craft's end to manage this, but it would be great for a plugin developer to be able to offer one plugin code base at both a "Free" and "Pro" level. It would be great if Craft could provide a way to check which level the plugin is at so a developer could provide functionality based on which level they are using. When the customer is ready to use the Pro features, they can subscribe to the plugin at that point.

  • This would allow plugin developers a way to offer some functionality fitting for a personal or smaller website without requiring payment, up front.
  • Upgrading from Free to Pro would be a much better customer experience than having to migrate settings from a Free plugin to a separate Paid version.
  • As a customer of Wordpress plugins, I hate when you download the free version of a plugin, then the plugin spams the control panel with "Upgrade to get this other feature" messages. Having a controlled and consistent way to do this—within the Plugin Store—would avoid plugin developers having to come up with their own upgrading methods. This would avoid my frustration, as well as avoid my clients needing to be bothered with these types of messages.
  • It provides a simple way for a developer to communicate which features they choose to be supported, if they choose to say the Free version is provided as-is (which ideally the Free version would still be updated)

@ryanmasuga
Copy link

Therefore all publicly distributable plugins must be available from public GitHub repos (whether OS or commercial/proprietary), and registered with Packagist.

Question about that: We don't use Github for our repos. To participate, we'd have to move repos to Github from Bitbucket? In other words, our commercial Link Vault plugin that is currently in a private repo at Bitbucket needs to move to a public GitHub repo?

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

@masuga Looks like Packagist also has a BitBucket hook (https://packagist.org/about) so that should work too, but yes it will need to be a public repo.

That may feel unsettling at first, but remember you are distributing unobfuscated PHP code, so there's not much your repo is keeping secret in the first place. And FWIW we are finding it to be a big net positive having Craft CMS out in the open, and we're looking forward to doing the same with Commerce.

@aelvan
Copy link

aelvan commented May 11, 2017

Looks like the training wheels are off for business models too! :)

Correct. Our stance is that one-time pricing just doesn't make sense for web software, especially CMS plugins. Even relatively simple plugins that are “feature-complete” are never actually “finished”, given all the moving parts, between bug reports, security vulnerabilities, browser and CMS platform changes, etc.—and that’s not even touching on normal support or feature updates! So one-time pricing just ends up being unsustainable in the long run.

All though I agree that there is a problem (sustainability of CMS plugins) and the analysis of the problem (making and maintaining software is frikkin' hard), I think the solution you're proposing is grossly simplified. I don't see the pricing model as being the main problem here.

If the volume of sales, ie. the size of the Craft user base, was big enough, a one-time fee (at the right price) would be able to support the maintenance of a plugin. The problem is that developing plugins for Craft is like trying to make a living by making custom gear-knobs for Dodge Vipers. Most likely you'll not sell enough to make a business out of it...

Comparing it to what works for developers of Wordpress plugins isn’t really relevant. With the difference in market size, it’s to be expected that different pricing models are necessary. When EE started to tank, prices got raised and new subscription models were introduced. That didn't help anyone, and the reason it didn't wasn't because the price models was wrong, it was because there wasn't a market to sustain the products anymore.

As far as I know, P&T has always used one-time fees both for your EE plugins and for Craft? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to have worked out just fine. The fact that it hasn't worked out for a lot of other developers, brings me to my second point...

Very, very few developers have what it takes to make a living off of making plugins. Developers see plugin development as a quick way to make some extra cash, and don't have the required skills and stamina to do long-term product development. It doesn't matter if the client pays a subscription, when they're off on vacation, burnt-out, or otherwise indisposed, there is no support and no upgrades. That tiny trickle of cash isn’t going to save anyone from being burnt out.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not opposed to having the option of subscription pricing models, I just don’t think it helps one way or the other. I think a much more effective strategy for long-term sustainability would be to discourage developers from venturing into the commercial plugin business. But, that can of course be done no matter how the plugin store works. :)

And, since I’ve already let it shine through that I hate commercial plugins and believe that the Craft community would be much better served by having a strong FOSS community backing it…

Subscription-only pricing tiers (no one-time pricing) at a range of fixed price points (starting at ~$49/year).

@brandonkelly Does this mean that there won’t be a place for free plugins in the official store?

@gisu
Copy link

gisu commented May 11, 2017

As I read this, the free plugins are not available through the store. Actually the store was once thought for all plugins as a central starting point. @aelvan

@carlcs
Copy link
Contributor

carlcs commented May 11, 2017

@aelvan @gisu Free plugins will be allowed and plugin devs are still free to sell elsewhere. See @brandonkelly’s replies to my questions in the #craft3 Slack channel this morning (9 hours ago).

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

brandonkelly commented May 16, 2017

And even Adobe is suffering because people have bolted to other solutions that don't require subscriptions (Sketch etc) and yet Adobe is an unassailable cornerstone of the huge majority of creative and design agencies. Even they resent subscribing.

First, Adobe isn’t suffering. What they pulled off with CC is pretty impressive. Their users may not love it, but they pay it, the world keeps spinning, and Photoshop & Illustrator keep getting better.

And Sketch? They’re on subscription too. Different model – the price only buys you a year of updates, but you can keep using what you’ve got if the subscription lapses. That’s the exact model I just said we’ll take a second look at in my last comment.

Paid upgrades is undeniably the traditional sustainable pricing model, but there's a reason the entire software industry is moving/has moved away from it, in favor of subscriptions: it sucks for developers, and results in bad software. Why? Because developers are incentivized to be constantly thinking of new features that will sell, rather than giving them the space to focus on under-the-hood improvements that are even more important.

We would rather incentivize developers to improve their plugins’ security, performance, and stability. The way to do that is with a subscription.

@AbbeyDesign
Copy link

Adobe boils down to ransom plain and simple and I would hardly call it a success. They own the market, there are no alternatives and they shoved this down everybody's throats. Though we're testing things like Affinity, we are still stuck with Adobe.

With that said, Adobe does not charge me per project and in the ~30 years of using Adobe, I have never had to use a plugin to make it function.

I get the whole subscription argument, and it's not a pretty pill to swallow, but pricing will be key to determine if we can keep moving forward with Craft.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 16, 2017

@brandonkelly In your Craft CMS and Craft Commerce subscription conversations, are you considering keeping the current one-time price repaid yearly or lowering it?

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

@stephencallender TBD, sorry..

@bgarrant
Copy link

bgarrant commented May 16, 2017

This whole discussion is really the decision of Brandon and the team. We can all add out thoughts and suggestions, but in the end they need to make money to keep Craft moving forward and the fantastic CMS that it is. Whatever the future holds for Craft core pricing, we will not know but please grandfather the existing ones that purchased with the understanding of "lifetime updates". We have even advertised that feature to get Craft clients coming from EE so please keep that benefit.

Subscription based models are a dangerous game. You can lose client and market share quickly going down that road. End clients do not want to pay subscriptions. They don't get it, they don't care, whatever the reason....they don't want to pay them. I think it will be a hard sale to get small business to start paying subscriptions on top of hosting, development costs and Craft licensing fees.

Don't forget the little clients that helped make Craft a success.

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

Whatever the future holds for Craft core pricing, we will not know but please grandfather the existing ones that purchased with the understanding of "lifetime updates". We have even advertised that feature to get Craft clients coming from EE so please keep that benefit.

If Craft core pricing changes, we absolutely will grandfather existing Client/Pro licenses into free updates.

@MattWilcox
Copy link

@brandonkelly - Adobe have the whole industry over a barrel, and that's why subscriptions have been a financial success for them. But talk to the people paying the subscriptions - you will be hard pushed to find anyone who's happy about it. I could pass you over to our accountant if you like, lol! The fact that Sketch etc have any success at all in the professional industries (rather than only with hobbyists) is down to Adobe's decision to move to subscription only. For all the loveliness of Sketch and other software, agencies didn't use them until Adobe went subscription only. Because we needed PSDs, because everyone else worked with PSDs. Moving to a subscription model where you couldn't use Adobe software at all unless you were paying the monthly fee was enough to prompt some smaller business's and agencies to move from Adobe. It wasn't the quality of competition software. Larger agencies are still over the barrel, and put up with the subscription. They don't see it as a benefit. I could even say that a fair few people in our company actually dislike getting rolling updates, because Adobe keep fucking up our workflows. Hell, the new New Document prompts are awful, they cost us time and money. We've turned them off. They're often anti-features.

I don't think there's a problem with the "subscription" model that you're proposing, which Sketch uses, where you get to use the version you had before the subscription lapses. But that's because it is really not a subscription at all, it's the old "pay for what you got, pay more later to get more" model.

But I am saying that for the vast majority of our clients, that first payment is the one and only payment you'll get. They won't continue to subscribe. Meanwhile, the term "subscription" will have put their heckles up immediately, and we'll basically have to say the following to get them back on board with Craft:

These are optional subscriptions, if you subscribe the plugin (or CMS) will continue to receive bug-fixes and new features as you use the software. If you don't subscribe, it's effectively a one-off fee you'll pay and you won't receive updates other than critical security ones. We recommend you subscribe, but if you do not everything will still work as it does now.

I am telling you what almost all our clients will choose to do in that scenario.

Here's the thing; the whole industry is struggling to force subscription models onto buyers as an answer to profitability problems. To do it with any success they're forcing the issue. There's this idea that stagnant software is bad - and technically it is. And an assumption that developers need to continue developing their software for quality not features - which is debatable because it boils down to whether enhanced quality is something end users will pay for.

The assumption that end users must want to buy updates is at fault. They generally don't. They only care when something breaks or there are new features that they need. No software house is going to change that.

Users think of it like buying cars. They bought the car, and they really don't care about next year's version and what it can do or what safety improvements it has over theirs. They're happy with the car they bought. If their car has a safety problem, they expect the manufacturer to call it in and fix it and it not to cost anything because they got sold a broken dangerous car.

Some people go on the "subscription" model where they get a new car every three years as long as they pay X per month. But that's not everyone, that's people that have the spare money to pay constantly. A lot of people pay once and drive that car until it pops.

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

I don't think there's a problem with the "subscription" model that you're proposing, which Sketch uses, where you get to use the version you had before the subscription lapses. But that's because it is really not a subscription at all, it's the old "pay for what you got, pay more later to get more" model.

Our hope is that the model encourages more agencies to pitch maintenance/retainer contracts to their clients, for several reasons stated previously, so we will continue thinking of it as a subscription to updates. But if you don’t like the word “subscription”, fine, don’t pitch it to your clients. Let’s stop beating the dead horse now :)

@MattWilcox
Copy link

My point is that we already pitch that stuff for maintenance contracts. Almost no one bites. But we always pitch - why wouldn't we, it's money in our pockets and peace of mind for the client.

@mrw
Copy link

mrw commented May 16, 2017

First of all, thanks to Brandon, Leslie, Brad, and other P&Ters for opening this discussion up to the community and listening to feedback. I've found it really helpful and interesting.

In general I'm totally supportive of any steps towards accomplishing P&T's stated goals of making plugin and license management easier, increasing end-user security, and making sure development is sustainable for developers while also affordable for clients.

Brandon's latest comment is:

We'll take a second look at the Sketch/JetBrains/Atlassian/etc model, where you pay for updates/support on a yearly basis, but you can use whatever version you’ve already got forever
...
maybe we still allow build updates (the Z in X.Y.Z) after a subscription lapses, so devs have a way to go back and patch old versions if they feel like it's warranted.

I'm personally a big fan of this model. I think clients and developers have an existing expectation that most downloadable software installed at a certain version will continue to run indefinitely without further charging (which I know you said was how it would work). That seems to be what many in this thread are pushing for and I think it's reasonable.

I also think developers need to be charging ongoing fees to provide ongoing services. That's why I like the idea that you pay, get something like a year of updates and support, and then have to continue paying yearly for any additional years of updates and support. If you don't pay you lose updates and support but not access to run the latest version you had access to. We buy our Atlassian software that way and it works well. It's also how many plugin developers already implicitly charge, with a time-limited support period and paid major upgrades. And developers can be free to offer a free minor version of an old version if they want to address a very serious, but old, vulnerability. That's what Microsoft did last week by releasing security patches to some old OSes.

I think it's admirable and smart that P&T wants to make sure plugins stay secure and developers are compensated to keep them secure. That helps the Craft community and internet at large. But I also think there's only so much that can be reasonably done for clients that won't prioritize budget for that.

Thanks again for allowing us to give feedback on your decision. I'm looking forward to seeing this!

@theskyfloor
Copy link

theskyfloor commented May 16, 2017

The Envato marketplace works like the Sketch/JetBrains/Atlassian/etc model as well. I really like this model and we often will re-up a support period if we are having an issue. Here is their little sidebar bug for reference. The plug-in represented here costs 24.00 dollars regularly, you save money by renewing early, and to renew support after the 6 month default period it comes with costs 17.50 - interesting pricing structure to say the least. Having support renewals is not very cut and dry and as I think about it I guess it isn't 100% a good 1:1 for Craft because it assumes that a client would want direct plug-in support when it is probably the developer who really uses that. I guess the better term is really updates/support... as Brandon has mentioned!

screen shot 2017-05-16 at 4 18 54 pm

@narration-sd
Copy link
Contributor

narration-sd commented May 16, 2017

It's been great to see the level of insight, expressed from each person in the community on this discussion.

What a small voice has kept mentioning to me is the word 'continuum'. That a way to answer everyone's needs is somewhat individually, because each of us are at some point in a continuum of employing Craft, and of what we can expect to successfully offer our appropriate customers.

What might our continuum of engagements look like, at strategic points, identified by level of commercialization -- with all appreciation of other contributions and measures?

  1. Deep 'enterprise level'-and-profitable consultative and developmental relationships, such as Craft itself and more established agencies very positively look to have with size- or topic-significant customers, such as national marketers, direct corporation clients, or political campaigns.

  2. Smaller but wide-service agencies with a full-spectrum sales capability, basing themselves around Craft as a platform both for its technology and its very valued practices.

  3. Designers and developers often contracting to agencies and sometimes to their own customers, making choices on opportunities as to which areas of the possible to contribute in, on a per-project basis.

  4. The very important sea of individuals who use and contribute often surprisingly to Craft or its support and projects, whether out of personal interest or on a path of growing into abilities or connections to make something of an income, as the potentials accumulate.

Looked at this way, it seems clear that Craft benefits well from each of these partnerings, and that setting things up so each of them has appropriate opportunities is going to give the best picture overall.

  • Especially listening to what persons here have been saying, it would be only the first tier and some of the second who would be at all able sell any variation of a subscription -- because only their customers are able to appreciate the importance of a solid, safe, and forward-progressive platform.

  • To continue to encourage everyone from the least-commercial onwards, to go forward with the great contributive community and its feelings which Craft most unusually has, must be of great value -- in the business-attentive sense as well as that we like it.

What are some points that might support this view?

a. Going for the gusto, if you have the necessary, as far as real consultations and developments with well-to-do customers. I think Craft has had visions of its own future in this area, and I think I would really encourage this. People who know they need individualized and add-on attention are usually quite willing to pay its real costs; it was ever so, and in the corporative language of today, it is to pay for 'talent'. If we know that there are actually many kinds....

I feel that this avenue for getting Craft's future assured, by its own consultancy and by payment for acknowledged privilege from partner agencies, is maybe the key thought missing at the moment, from the entirely sensible as well as intuitive drive to 'do something about the visible future'.

Consulting speaks for itself, and will be a fine driver of new abilites for Craft, its innovation. The part about partner agencies means their taking of responsibility they will appreciate as much as their significant customers, to price in an ongoing support for the Craft platform as part of their maintaining, upgrade, and innovation budget line item to the customer.

You can fill in blanks about acknowleging such sustaining partners, but I think in the sense of the unusual Craft culture in particular, they shouldn't (and wouldn't want to) be made exclusionary to the larger community. This was a problem definitely with a past company we will remember. More responsibility taken, more recognition -- but not more privilege, save for specific contracts with Craft's consultancy side. As an approach....

b. So, in essence, larger players will pay subscriptions-in-principle, and also specific contracts will pay for innovation that builds the product for the larger community.

It occurs to me that some intermediate customers might be willing to take on some size of ongoing payments -- as an option, to support the platform.

A soft sell here, then, not attacking subscription-resistance, but rather suggesting in the way that 'big boys and girls' do contribute to things that strengthen the software industry depends on, using as open source as the big example. In a reverse-judo sort of way, this might help with take-up of own maintenance plans also? We can but try....

c. Encouraging that immense resource by now of the greater Craft community, I'd think as before that the mechanisms for the Store (and anything else around Craft) should be open to anyone -- as I believe is already agreed. People should be able to deploy their plugins in a safe and simple way, thus ever reducing Craft's own support burden.

How they charge for them...is then the matter of thought as we know. I somehow can't see personally how a one-plan-for-all can work on this, if really very much appreciating the thinking about establishing a baseline to up plugin long-term dependability and quality. Again, we have experience.

I wonder if a self-certifying framework could do the trick? You agree to a certain level of Craft-authored guidelines, to achieve a certain 'stamp' in the store. Then pricing, including possible maintenance plans (that only as a subscription, and optional) can follow appropriately. That Craft authors the requirements means their so-often good thinking gains the benefits necessary for themselves, and good for everyone.

A continuum can then be fit, from free-entry/experimental-community-support offerings, to full-on commercial plugins as we understand them, to individualized-corporate-paid-support enterprise packages.

Allowing those last on the store might be a way both to publicize what you did, and also to benefit the original developmental customer by spreading out thus minimizing their future costs.

d. Going to stop here, as no doubt this is long enough -- and I am warming to the feeling of how this community discusses things. Older dogs can indeed learn where we didn't expect to...we find out!

I'd like to close with one specific, among the many nice things that might be said for Craft themselves, in the reflections on that simply great online discussion. I've already complimented what we all recognize and appreciate in Brandon's actual front-end leadership, in the principles he and Brad have been making so solidly thoughtful and present in all the Craft experiences. As an 'older guy', and a friend, I get to do that, I think....

With this, something I particularly found to ground the many facets of talk, and add to what was satisfying, was how Leslie came forward this time, so that we could understand much better what his thinking is, and natures then of its influence.

I had a much better feeling afterwards, including the sense of histories being recognized; and freed thus, what the futures now can hold. Thank you, Leslie, and for the Craft team approach of recognizing, bringing in, each of the voices.

-- Clive

@putyourlightson
Copy link

putyourlightson commented May 17, 2017

In case anyone missed today's Plugin Store FAQ update...

How will licensing work?
When you buy a plugin license, it’s yours to use forever, however access to updates will be cut off after one year, at which point you will have the opportunity to buy another year of updates for a renewal fee.

Personally this feels like a great outcome to the discussion and it has been a wonderful process to witness unfold. Thanks to everyone involved, great to see everyone's point of view listened to!!

@michaelrog
Copy link

How much will the renewal fees cost?

It’s up to the developer, but we will recommend somewhere between a 50-80% discount on the initial license fee.

The decision to allow the initial and renewal costs to be different (and developer-controlled) is a BIG DEAL in my view. (I'm all-aboard the "normalize subscriptions as the go-to plugin biz model" train. This will make it way easier for me.)

THANK YOU!!!

@damienbuckley
Copy link

I think that model makes total sense and is fair all-round. Good discussion. Good result

@michaelrog
Copy link

michaelrog commented May 17, 2017

p.s. I'm assuming what's meant by access to updates will be cut off after one year is that the easy one-click updating in the CP wouldn't be available if your subscription isn't active, but technically one could still update manually via Composer?

(That'd make sense, in context of previously mentioned technical constraints. In those cases, I could envision the "Update Plugin" button being replaced by a "Renew Subscription & Update Plugin" button, or something along those lines.)

@MattWilcox
Copy link

That model feels fair for everyone and one that we can sell our clients on. Great stuff, thanks for the discussion :)

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

p.s. I'm assuming what's meant by access to updates will be cut off after one year is that the easy one-click updating in the CP wouldn't be available if your subscription isn't active, but technically one could still update manually via Composer?

Nope, we came up with a way to prevent Composer from updating past the licensed version: the plugin store is going to be its own Packagist repo, so it can factor in the plugin’s license status before telling Composer which version to update to.

@BenParizek
Copy link
Contributor

BenParizek commented Oct 13, 2017

I've gone back and forth on how to potentially offer a free version of our plugins for certain use cases. It sounds like the existing store will allow plugins to be free and allow us to offer a Free Trial option of a commercial license. Both good options.

However, I'm not sure that I've seen a discussion of how to give a plugin with a commercial license an option to be free in some instances. Whether this is supported out of the box or not, one way to approach it could be to allow a commercial plugin to make itself free if the free version of Craft, Craft Personal, is in use.

Giving commercial plugin the option to be freely used with Craft Personal could be a nice baseline for Craft to judge whether a commercial plugin has a free option or not, and, if a commercial plugin desired to restrict any features, it could take extra steps to check for the version of Craft that is installed and display the user an upgrade message in a plugin.

@narration-sd
Copy link
Contributor

@BenParizek this may seem an easy win in some ways, but I think it precludes an important case.

What about a non-profit, etc., which benefits from Craft's support in having a higher level license that they need? Or one which could have a similar permission from the plugin provider?

My feeling is that it should always be possible to permit registered plugin users to be granted free use.

This shouldn't be a big demand on design, as the ability's requirements should already be there with the Free Trial feature, no?

@BenParizek
Copy link
Contributor

BenParizek commented Oct 13, 2017

@narration-sd Here's a breakdown of the distinction I'm trying to make:

  • Free Trial - let a user test a plugin for free for a limited number of days
  • Free License - let a plugin developer take action to issue a free license to a user for an unlimited amount of time
  • Free Version - let a plugin developer offer a license for a full-featured version of a plugin for an unlimited amount of time, with the ability to restrict the user from certain types of use (such as using it on different versions of Craft or using advanced features)

I'm not taking any issue with Free Trial and Free License options. They are essential and enough to get started with. My interest is the potential for a plugin developer to easily grant a user free access to their plugin (with conditions) without restricting the time it can be used for or requiring all features to be granted for an unlimited amount of time.

@narration-sd
Copy link
Contributor

@BenParizek Ok, this framing of what you want makes sense.

My point would be that Free Version should be its own permiso, enacted by the developer, and not tied by the Store to a particular license level of Craft. The ability to do that could be part of the developer-enacted permiso, when desired.

@davidhellmann
Copy link
Contributor

A Badge on each installed plugin would be nice :)

@brandonkelly
Copy link
Member

@davidhellmann now that the Plugin Store actually exists, let's post new feature requests as their own issues, thanks!

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jul 3, 2018

Done ప్రచురణ

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests