The future of EventCatalog: a licence I'm considering, and why

[boyney123]

Thinking out loud: how EventCatalog v5 might be licensed, and why

Status: Exploring, nothing decided ·

I'm pinning this as the one place to talk about this. Please ask and push back here rather than in issues so the conversation stays together. I'll keep it updated and note edits at the bottom.

Where my head is at

I started EventCatalog as a side project to document event-driven architecture as things (services, events, schemas, flows, teams) rather than pages. It's now run every day by hundreds of organisations, many of them large, most of them on the free version. Usage has roughly doubled in the last year, and the way people use it has changed: catalogs are bigger, more teams read them, and more of them are being fed by agents.

The data is also showing me something uncomfortable. EventCatalog has been open core: the catalog is free and MIT, and the paid tiers were integrations and automations. AI is eating the value of those paid features. A custom generator against the SDK is now a short job for anyone, and most of you who run EventCatalog every day never used the paid integrations anyway. At the same time, the value people get from the tool itself is going up. So I'm in a weird place: the thing I charge for is worth less every month, and the thing that's worth more is free.

Open core has always felt a bit odd to me for that reason. You spend your time deciding what's free and what's paid, and the line never sits in the right place. What if I stopped trying to draw that line and let everybody get the whole of EventCatalog?

What I've been weighing

Charge per user, or per resource. This is what most tools do. I don't want to. Per-seat pricing means someone at your company deciding who is and isn't allowed to look at the architecture, which is the opposite of what EventCatalog is for. Per-resource pricing means you pay more the better you document, and every service, event and schema you add makes the bill bigger. I want you to document everything and get value from it, not ration it. Both also need metering, and EventCatalog is self-hosted by design because your architecture is sensitive. I don't want it phoning home about what's in your catalog, and I don't think you'd want that either.

Close the source. Would work commercially, and would throw away the community, the contributions and the transparency that make EventCatalog something a large organisation can trust inside its walls. No.

Hosted only. Keep everything free and charge for a cloud version. Most of you want to self-host, and for good reason: your architecture knowledge should remain yours. I don't want to store it, and keeping things self-hosted keeps them simple for you and for me. So this isn't a model I want to explore at the moment.

Keep going as I am. I've thought hard about this one. If I change nothing, the project keeps growing in usage and the business underneath it doesn't, and at some point that catches up with a one-person project. I believe EventCatalog can get somewhere much bigger than it is, and be far more useful to everyone using it. Doing nothing means it doesn't get there. So doing something now makes sense to me, and I'd rather think about it in the open.

So what does that leave? Possibly a commercial licence to use EventCatalog in your organisation, if your organisation is above a certain size. Everyone else gets everything, free.

What I'm considering

The shape I keep coming back to is the Business Source License 1.1, which is a source-available licence with a fixed date on which each version becomes open source. After a lot of thought, it's the option I think best balances the needs of the EventCatalog community, the people using it, contributing to it, and the consultancies and partners building on it, with the financial sustainability I need to keep building and maintaining the software properly.

There's also a way in which this would be more open than what we have today, not less. Under open core, the paid integrations and features have been closed: licence-keyed, and not something you could read or change. Under BSL, all of it would be public. Every line of EventCatalog, including everything that was previously behind a plan, would be there to read, copy, modify and redistribute, free to use in production for the large majority of organisations, and MIT for everyone four years after each release. More people would get more rights than they have now. The only thing it asks in return is that organisations above a certain size pay for a licence, which is what keeps the company behind the software viable. Roughly:

• Free, in production, for: individuals; public open-source projects; teaching and academic research; and any organisation, including public bodies and non-profits, with under $10M consolidated annual revenue (or annual budget).
• Free for everyone for development, testing, contributing, demos and evaluation, with a 60-day evaluation for real use that I'd extend on request.
• One organisation-wide commercial licence for organisations at or above $10M. It would include everything: all features, integrations, generators, MCP, unlimited users and catalogs. Priced by revenue band, with the bands on the pricing page rather than in the licence so they can change without the licence changing.
• Every release becomes MIT four years after it ships.
• v4 stays MIT. Nothing is withdrawn.

This isn't a new idea. It would put EventCatalog on a path similar to a number of companies in recent years: Sentry, HashiCorp, FingerprintJS and CockroachDB have all moved to the Business Source License, and MariaDB, who developed it in 2013, still use it. CockroachDB in particular landed on the same shape I'm describing: everything included, free for companies under $10M in annual revenue, a licence above that.

To be clear, that would make v5 source-available, not open source, and I wouldn't call it open source. The source stays public, you can read it and modify it, and every version converts to MIT on a fixed date. That feels like the fairest arrangement available for a project that needs to fund itself, but I'm interested in whether you see it the same way.

Why revenue brackets

I don't want to rip anyone off. Pricing by the size of your organisation feels fair to me: a $5B company with forty teams on EventCatalog gets a lot more from it than a twelve-person startup, and can afford to give something back so the project keeps improving for everyone and so I can grow the team building it. A startup under $10M pays nothing, and shouldn't. It's the same idea Duende took with IdentityServer and Docker took with Desktop, and it's the one that seems to fit a self-hosted tool maintained by a small team.

What I'd want to commit to if I did this

• No feature gates. The free and paid product would be the same code. No Enterprise Edition.
• No phone-home of your architecture. EventCatalog would never send catalog content, schemas or resource names anywhere. Builds send anonymous version and plan telemetry, which you can turn off.
• Self-certification. You tell us your revenue band. No technical audits.
• Existing customers keep their agreements, get v5 included, and keep a permanent loyalty position on the ladder.
• A proper notice period, at least 90 days, before any licence change applies to a release, and this thread as the place I answer questions.

For larger organisations

I know a $2B company doesn't buy something to find out if it works. So alongside the 60-day evaluation, I'm exploring a "prove the value" option: a fixed-scope engagement where one team installs and runs EventCatalog properly, with a sponsor, agreed success criteria and my help, beyond the trial and before anyone commits to an organisation-wide licence. If you'd find that useful, or you'd do it differently, tell me.

What I think the consequences would be

Some organisations over $10M would stay on v4 rather than pay. That's a legitimate choice and v4 will keep working. My job would be to make v5 worth the upgrade, not to force it.

Consultancies working for clients wouldn't need their own licence; the client's status would decide. Bundling EventCatalog into something you sell or host for others would need a separate agreement, as it does in practice today.

Where I want v5 to go

If a licence pays for the roadmap, it's fair to say what the roadmap is. I want EventCatalog to be the system of record for your architecture that both people and agents read: the place an engineer, or a coding agent, checks before changing an event, a service or a contract. That means making the catalog load-bearing rather than descriptive: drift detection that can block a pull request, governance rules that can fail a build, MCP as the way agents understand your architecture before they touch it, and the editor and visual tooling that make the catalog easy to keep true.

The integrations wouldn't go away. They'd become free, SDK-backed examples of how to feed the catalog, which is what they should have been all along.

The other thing a licence would pay for is people. EventCatalog is still mostly me, and I want to stay bootstrapped: no outside money deciding what the roadmap is or who the product is for. What I'd do with licence revenue is reinvest it in the project itself: grow a small team so releases, support and documentation don't depend on one person's week, put more into the community that's carried this project for years, and keep improving the product for everyone using it, including all of you on the free tier. The point of the change isn't to extract more from EventCatalog; it's to put more back in.

Your thoughts

I'd love your feedback on this, and I mean that. The threshold, the bands, the evaluation length, the prove-the-value idea, whether BSL is even the right licence: none of it is decided, and this thread is where I'll be reading.

Thank you for using EventCatalog, and for reading this far.

— Dave

[Rooster212]

Hey @boyney123. We chatted a while back about my company's requirements and I know for a fact from our conversation that you are 100% committed to giving people the best value they can - you could have tried to convince me to go for a paid tier (as we discussed federation etc.) but you were very transparent and said it wouldn't be necessary. I mention this because I know from that conversation that you are not trying to do everything in your power to make money over giving people the tools they need to document their architecture.

We have used EventCatalog internally for a while - we haven't been great at keeping it up to date but that's an us problem. I love the product, it's clean, user friendly, extensible and you've done an amazing job updating it even when it potentially doesn't make you any money.

I like your current split of pricing - I think if anything your 250 user threshold is extremely generous. As a company of ~25 it works for us as is, although with the increase of our usage in AI tooling we'd pay for those features before we reach the user threshold, and I think it's a fair cost.

As someone who does a lot of homelab/self hosting but also has responsibilities for making decisions on what we host at work, I maybe have a good perspective to share. Personally I like the route that a lot of open source projects take where they provide the community with the majority of features for their self hosted service, but provide a cloud offering. Obviously there are costs and difficulties involved with a cloud offering so it has to work for you as the maintainer of that infrastructure as well.

I also think as an open source maintainer a huge threat is AI - someone can take your core, then see what features they want on top and "just" get their AI tools to build it. Will it ever be as good as your own implementations, and do they get support from you? No - but for a lot of people that will be enough.

In conclusion: Event Catalog needs to live on no matter what. It's an awesome product that provides huge value, and it isn't fair that you can't benefit from your hard work. I think for us the barrier of entry/cost has led to slight hesitation, but it's not so high that we wouldn't jump on it when our priorities are lined up. I think your plan to convert released versions to MIT licensed code on a delay is incredibly generous.

[boyney123]

Hey @Rooster212 great to hear from you.

Yeah I thought about cloud offering before, but of people I have asked in the past it very rarely comes up to be honest, most of my users prefer the self hosted model, and not really interested in a cloud offering. Also as a single person maintaining this (for now), and bootstrapped I'm not sure I want the extra work, security, risk, and SLAs etc..... (ofc this could change if more people say they want it).

Yeah under the new potential model, everyone gets the same package, but companies pay based on gross revenue numbers. Under 10M would not need to pay, a 60 day trial for anyone, and small increments as revenue grows.

The general thinking is, if EventCatalog gives you value, that some of that saving/value is returned and invested back into the project. I think its a win from both sides, but happy to be challenged by anyone.

[fraillt]

Hi @boyney123,
I like your current trajectory. I like simple and fair model.

• Simple. You can build the right thing from the day one, meaning you can use all the features. I think this is especially true for this kind of product, because it should grow with your organization/team(s) from day one. It would be frustrating to say "Finally, we can afford to have documentation in EventCatalog (so we need to migrate it somehow), and throw away our hand-written service definitions.". Other products might have so called enterprise-features, for example user RBAC, where you need them once organization is mature enough, but these features doesn't fundamentally change how you use the product.
• Fair. I cannot give you advice on this one, you'll have to find a sweep spot where you feel rewarded and customers feel invited to contribute and doesn't feel robbed :) IMHO, "Free ... with under $10M consolidated annual revenue (or annual budget)." is generous.

Random ideas...

• AI. Current licensing (Up to 250 employees for Business, and more than 251+ Enterprise) probably doesn't work anymore. Modern organizations fully utilizing the power of AI can get away with much less people. So I would probably ignore this aspect in evaluating licensing options.
• Training. I think this could be very valuable in terms of money and shaping the direction of the product. You're in position to know the best how to "unlock the power of EventCatalog", by seeing how people use it and where EventCatalog needs to expand.
• Real-time integrations. This is very random and not related to licensing at all, and if you already thought about it, then just ignore :)
  Anyway... I always struggled to keep docs in sync with reality. That's why bigger companies prefer spec-first vs code-first approach. I was thinking, that it would be nice to have integrations that would show physical layer (how things actually are) and map it to documentation. For example, https://sematext.com/service-map/ can shows service map from opentelemetry tracing data. Maybe it could be used to understand what is out-of-sync, not documented yet or no longer used. However, it's a bit of Pandora's box, you would need to draw the line somewhere, otherwise EventCatalog would become Grafana :)

TLDR;

I like where you want to go with the licensing. It's simple and fair, and also generous.

[boyney123]

Hey @fraillt

Thanks for taking the time for the feedback.

Up to 250 employees for Business, yeah you are right, the new model would not have any seat limits, or anything like that just focus on a commercial license, depending on bracket.

Will write up some more thoughts on feedback I have been given hopefully this explains where my head it at after the initial feedback.

[boyney123]

I have also been collecting feedback offline from folks, and mostly people seem to be supportive which is great.

One thing people have said is the journey that EventCatalog gets adopted. Many teams and orgs start with one team to evaluate which takes time and we would need to make sure we have a solution for this for folks.

I'm thinking a 60-90 day trial for EventCatalog (All features) and then commercial license would kick in. But for teams that need more time, and extension path for them (prove the value model), where they can get a discounted license to prove the value internally before going into a full commercial license. I'm not 100% sure yet, but I will take into consideration the journey that the catalog is adopted.

[LarsArtmann]

I tried to adopt EventCatalog at to enterprises as a contractor and failed at the paywall before I could prove the value.

[boyney123]

Hey @LarsArtmann

Thanks for that feedback. I'm thinking about two options here

• Offer a 60/90 day trial for EventCatalog
• Offer a paid "prove the value" program (3 months) fixed price ($5k maybe), where we define 1 workflow with your team, and work with you to prove the value.

Would these things made your life easier?

[ivangsa]

I Dave

It sounds like a good direction for the project.

Obviously open-core didnt quite match what you needed from EC as a business and it showed everywhere in the copy about licensing and the different subscription models. I had proposed EC in bank and nobody really understood if it was opensource, if we were going to be able to modify some of its features. Confusing..

Regarding subscription based extensions, you are right. We were considering a few like the asyncapi/openapi generators bc we are an API-First shop, and they didnt feel like they were a well rounded product, nor something to pay as a subscription, maybe as a one time payment, maybe..

So this is a good, and it feels honest and sincere movement..

The business needs to be healthy, because there is a bus factor of one. Not good for enterprise adoption/perception.

As a long time opensource contributor and maintainer. EC looked like you didnt feel comfortable with the license you chose when it was a hobby/ side project. It didnt feel somewhere to happily contribute (also bc you were too fast explpring in every direction, hard to follow)

I'm also an explorer of this particular domain (EDA) as developer and opensourcerer.

I hope you get to grow the business and the project. Because it was really inspiring how you went from hobby to self-sustained bootstrapped oss project. (We can see also your hair whitening, but nevertheless very inspiring)

Just two personal opinions if mine:

• make the project extensible, with an open API or extension points os something. Let customers help themselves

• I may take your last oss version and keep it live as oss software. Not really thinking in evolving a long term form, but maybe maintaining it in a healthy shape, of build and dependency updates.

Another opinion, now a bit adversarial... but still honest. I dont see EC as a goberning tool, nor a designing tool... Just a website, derived from existing APIs and documents.. (But the designer and goberning tool are still required and an empty space)

Looking forward the continuity of your project..

Have fun!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1saludo!

[boyney123]

Hey @ivangsa

Thanks for taking the time for your feedback!

Obv/iously open-core didnt quite match what you needed from EC as a business and it showed everywhere in the copy about licensing and the different subscription models. I had proposed EC in bank and nobody really understood if it was opensource, if we were going to be able to modify some of its features. Confusing..

Thanks for that, yeah it's been hard over the years to work out what is working, what should go where, and how to make this all sustainable. The last thing I wanted to do is make it confusing, but it's really hard to find a value based product, without levers I can pull to charge with usage that is fair. I feel doing this model to simplify things may be easier, and already got some good feedback on it.

Regarding subscription based extensions, you are right. We were considering a few like the asyncapi/openapi generators bc we are an API-First shop, and they didnt feel like they
were a well rounded product, nor something to pay as a subscription, maybe as a one time payment, maybe..

Thanks for that, any feedback you have around the well rounded product? Feel they don't carry enough value you mean?

I hope you get to grow the business and the project. Because it was really inspiring how you went from hobby to self-sustained bootstrapped oss project. (We can see also your hair whitening, but nevertheless very inspiring)

Haha... yeah and having kids, the hair loses color haha. But yeah it's been a great ride so far, I have much more I want to do, but I feel things need to change to do that.

• make the project extensible, with an open API or extension points os something. Let customers help themselves

Do you have any example?

Another opinion, now a bit adversarial... but still honest. I dont see EC as a goberning tool, nor a designing tool... Just a website, derived from existing APIs and documents.. (But the designer and goberning tool are still required and an empty space)

Yeah understand what you mean, I have explored this space, but I feel once these things are sorted, I have a bunch of things on the roadmap to work on to hopefully help here.

[ivangsa]

Regarding subscription based extensions, you are right. We were considering a few like the asyncapi/openapi generators bc we are an API-First shop, and they didnt feel like they
were a well rounded product, nor something to pay as a subscription, maybe as a one time payment, maybe..

Thanks for that, any feedback you have around the well rounded product? Feel they don't carry enough value you mean?

That we have other files along asyncapi.yml/openapi.yml (like readme.md, summary.md, changelog.md, texhnicaldebt.md) that we want to be part of the import.. but the extension did t know about..

[DomenicDev]

Hey David,

The direction you're targeting is plausible. I totally understand the reasoning.

(Disclaimer: I don't use EventCatalog (yet), but I am interested in projects and solo-businesses like yours.)

Not that long ago, I explored your pricing page and saw a section about fair pricing. It reminds me of what you described here (bigger organizations were asked to pay/contribute more) and I wonder how it was different from what you have in mind right now? In the meantime, the pricing page changed and doesn't look like that anymore.

Cheers,
Domenic

[thim81]

Hi David,

Did you also looked at the PolyForm Noncommercial license?

It has similar characteristics except for the evolution of the code to open after 4 years.

I m interested in understanding your reasoning for considering BSL over a PolyForm Noncommercial license.

Regards,
Tim

[boyney123]

Hey @thim81 ,

Great to hear from you.

Good question, I looked at a few (e.g Fair Source), it felt that BSL with additional grants suited what I needed, and I also like the idea of open source after 3/4 years too, as it keeps some good faith there I believe.... and I quite like that. Also I felt BSL might be better understood by teams and legal teams reviewing licenses that other ones.

But I will take a look at the PolyForm one again, I did come across it... but will review again, thanks for the heads up.

Love to know your thoughts @thim81 on the general idea and move into a commercial license model?

Thanks!

[thim81]

I would find it logical to mature EventCatalog into a commercial license model, especially since you want to be able to continue the support and development of it. I also like the pricing by the size of your organisation, which is also fair.

These companies can always request a temporary license, in case they want to pilot the EventCatalog.

[mjftw]

Hi @boyney123,

Thanks for taking the time to write this up and discuss in public.
Many companies spring licensing changes on their customers and it's refreshing to see an open conversation with the community about what could work for everyone.
The pricing and business model proposed sounds sensible to me.

One thing that comes to mind:
The value a company gets from EventCatalog scales with how widely it's adopted, not with how large or profitable the company is. If a very large company (say Amazon, to be extreme) adopted it in a single business unit, it would land in the top revenue band and pay top price for a rollout that might never go beyond that unit. From a procurement point of view that can look like a high cost for the value received, because of the scale of adoption rather than the product.

I'm not sure how you'd measure planned or actual adoption reliably without metering, which you've rightly ruled out. One option might be to let organisations license at the subsidiary or business-unit level and self-certify that unit's revenue or budget, in keeping with the self-certification approach. Feels a bit complex though. Consolidated revenue may still be the best compromise, and you'll have far better data than me on how rollouts actually look across paying customers.

So TL;DR - I think it sounds a sensible and fair pricing model, and opens the door to community development across the entire product, which can only be a good thing.

Also, as someone whose company pays for EventCatalog today, thanks for honouring existing agreements. Surprise licence changes are all too common and very disruptive, so the commitment is appreciated 🙏🏽

[boyney123]

Hey @mjftw

Thank for taking the time!

I've thought more about the revenue based pricing and you're right, the value is with adoption not how much the company makes, so I feel maybe going to teams or something like that is better.

We can measure adoption by looking at how much the catalog how grown, and being used over time, there might be some reports and metrics we can add to this, mostly this stuff is in git for most.... so something like that could help.

If we move to teams, I wonder if something like this would work? #2882 (comment)

Any feedback welcome!

[boyney123]

Update: where I've landed on pricing

Thanks everyone for the feedback here and in private. It's shaped a lot of this. Here's where things stand. Nothing is final yet, and I'd love your thoughts.

The licence (mostly unchanged)

• EventCatalog v5 moves to the Business Source License (BSL 1.1). v4 stays MIT, and every v5 release becomes MIT after four years.
• It's free for organisations with under $10M revenue and under $10M raised, and always free for individuals, open source projects, and teaching and research.
• If your organisation is above either line, you need a commercial licence.
• There are no seats and no meters. You self-certify, and I don't audit.

How the commercial licence is priced

The biggest change: pricing is based on how many teams use EventCatalog, not your company's size. Almost every organisation starts with one team and grows from there, and the price should follow that.

Plan	Teams	Price per year
Business	up to 5	$5,995
Business	6–15	$9,995
Business	16–30	$14,995
Enterprise	30+, or when you need what's below	from $19,995

• A team is a real team of up to about 10 people who read or edit the catalog most months.
• AI agents are included. Copilot, Cursor, Claude or your own agents using the catalog over MCP don't count toward anything.
• Your price is fixed for the year. Add teams freely, and we adjust at renewal. If you're just one team over a band, you stay on your current price for another year.
• Business includes everything to document your architecture, including SSO, plus support and standard terms. There's a Trust pack for security and procurement reviews.
• Enterprise adds federation across team catalogs, an SLA, monthly calls, and your own contract and security review.

On feature gates: in my first post I said there would be none. The documentation product is the same on every plan. The one exception is federation, which only matters when several catalogs need to come together across a large organisation, so it sits in Enterprise. I want to be upfront that this is a change from what I said.

Trying it before you buy

@LarsArtmann's point about hitting the paywall before proving the value stuck with me. So:

• Every organisation gets a 30-day free evaluation, extendable up to 90 days for larger roll-outs or security and procurement reviews. Just tell me who's sponsoring it and what success looks like.
• When an evaluation ends, your catalog keeps building. You'll just see a reminder to add a licence key.
• For teams that want hands-on help, there's an optional "prove the value" programme: $6,000 for six months, credited against your first year.

Existing customers

If you already pay for EventCatalog, I'll talk to each of you personally before anything changes. Your current arrangement carries over for about a year before moving to the new pricing.

What I'd love feedback on

• Does pricing by teams feel fair, and is it easy to work out your number?
• Do the bands (5 / 15 / 30) match how your organisation actually works?
• Anything that would stop you recommending this internally?

Thanks again. This has been a genuinely useful discussion.

[LarsArtmann]

Trying it before you buy

Sounds good. I was worried about the 30 days being to short for big orgs (multi billion dollar companies), but the up to 90 days with

When an evaluation ends, your catalog keeps building. You'll just see a reminder to add a licence key.

sounds like a very good idea. This would have made it a lot more likely for me to have had success bringing it to the companies I didn't managed to get to adopt in the past.

[LarsArtmann]

It's free for organisations with under $10M revenue and under $10M raised, and always free for individuals, open source projects, and teaching and research.

This is also very good!

[LarsArtmann]

There are no seats and no meters. You self-certify, and I don't audit.

I am not that much into the EventCatalog user management system, but if the EventCatalog instance would have very reasonable grounds of expecting a customer under pays: a dismissible notification could be justified (just because many companies will sign up for the minimum and forget about it when adding more people)

[boyney123]

Thanks for the feedback @LarsArtmann, happy it landed well with you.

I am not that much into the EventCatalog user management system, but if the EventCatalog instance would have very reasonable grounds of expecting a customer under pays: a dismissible notification could be justified (just because many companies will sign up for the minimum and forget about it when adding more people)

Yeah, my thoughts so far, are people sign up with the initial scope they want. And at renewal we will review together, we do capture analytics for catalogs (non sensitive stuff) so we can run tools across catalogs to see how much usage it is getting (think of it as a score) with that and feedback from customer, I think we can both come to usage for the year.... thats my thinking anyway. The other option is I force people to sign in and create orgs etc... but not sure I want to go that far to be honest, and keep things simple and honest.

[LarsArtmann]

Forcing people to use users + auth and co sounds meh. I like your think.

[boyney123]

Update: v5 is live

Thanks again for all the feedback here. I really appreciate it, and it genuinely shaped where we ended up.

We've now settled on a few decisions and v5 is live:

• EventCatalog v5 is released under the Business Source License (BSL 1.1). v4 stays MIT, and every v5 release becomes MIT four years after it ships.
• It's free for individuals, open source projects, teaching and research, and organisations with under $10M revenue and under $10M raised.
• Larger organisations buy a licence priced by usage: how many teams use the catalog. That means no seats, no per-resource fees, and AI agents are included. It starts with one team and grows as your organisation adopts it.
• Everyone gets a 60-day evaluation of the full product, which we can extend. If an evaluation ends without a licence, your builds keep working.

We hope this change keeps EventCatalog sustainable for the long term, and lets us put more back into the project: more people working on it, better support for the community, and the roadmap many of you have asked for.

We've also had feedback through other channels outside this discussion: calls, emails and conversations with customers and teams using EventCatalog. It's been genuinely well received and understood, and a few parts of the final model came straight from it, including the longer evaluation, the Success Programme and the rule that builds never break.

The full details, and the reasoning behind them, are in the blog post: Introducing EventCatalog v5: One product, everything included.. The pricing page and licensing FAQ cover whether you qualify and what a licence costs.

We look forward to continuing with EventCatalog, delivering the value you need from a project you can trust, and having a great future together. If you think we've got something wrong, tell us here.

Thank you 🙏❤️