Can’t find source code


there is an announcement on which says Fritzing 1.0 has been released. I’d like to have a look, so I tried to find the code in order to build the program, but the only thing I can find is a very outdated repository on github – that’s obviously not the right place, although Fritzing - electronics made easy is pointing there. So where is the code of the software?

I know that one can download an appimage after „donating“ some coins. That’s not the point, I’d donate the same amount for the code as well, but I’m not willing to waste precious ressources and litter my operating system with fully bloated appimages.


That is exactly my question also! On the repository of my linux operating system PCLinuxOS,
only an outdated version is avaliable. The package people there asked me where they can find
the source code because they also could not find it.

I’m curious also… @vanepp has been involved in the 1.0.0 release, maybe he can shed some light…

The 1.0 release was done outside the github repo. The repo will be updated to reflect 1.0 when they get time to do it as I understand it (I’m not part of the development team, I just got a pre release version of 1.0 to test so this may or may not be correct.)


1 Like

The 1.0 release was done outside the github repo

Would love to hear from a developer on the project what the motivation for this is. It’s strange to see an opensource hardware initiative create software that isn’t fully opensource (it feels like closed development fits somewhere between fully opensource and freeware).

Pre-release? Outside github repo? That seems quite concerning… :flushed:

Is still the current situation the one mentioned here?


Sync to github will happen within the next days.

There are several reasons why we currently don’t prefer GitHub. For example, a single CI run could easily cost more than $10 there. From version 0.9.10 to 1.0.0 we had roughly five to ten thousand CI runs. Others are, that a lot of communication happens over the ‘coffee machine’ ,phone, email. This is nothing new, it is how we work since four years.
Fritzing is released under the GPL. That is by choice.

Fritzing Development
When projects are successful, they often quickly grow beyond the ‘a few hours at the weekend’ scale.
Fritzing was never a small project, and development is done by paid developers. The original team
tried various ways to fund this. Selling Kits, a parts creation service, workshops, working together with Fabs… None of these businesses grew big enough so you could pay for the software development for the application itself. Even if selling Fritzing Creator Kits is very successful, if you spend a lot of that on software development, then the competition will be able to sell Kits at much lower prices.
A great comment related to this was recently made by Thomas Sanladerer.

So the situation was this, too complex for a hobby project, but also, no income. In 2016, development on Fritzing ceased.


In 2019, Aisler started an initiative to find a Maintainer for Fritzing, to which I responded.
As a software developer, all that legal and finance things were quite a steep learning curve, but about one and a half year later, I was able to put the main focus on the software again.
I made contact with all the involved parties, resolved blockages, restructured the organization, and found sustainable funding for it.
The latter was and still is possible with the huge community of Fritzing users, who see the
service fee on as a fair deal and a way to support the development. Thanks to everyone here again!

One important part of the deal is that we (Fritzing Team and Contributors) continue Fritzing as an Open Source project.
Another part is, that people are aware that developing Fritzing is a full-time task for a team, and that giving away the results of that work is not self-evident. Without this, or with an expectation that “apps have to be for free”, it would not work.

Possible solutions for funding differ vastly amongst Open Source projects.
Let me try to describe several categories, that a project might match:

  • A project might be some obscure library, never seen by end users. All who are in contact with it are developers who are able to detect bugs or even provide fixes.

  • Something like a browser engine, almost too big to fail. Some organization will always fund it.

  • It might help the work of highly specialized engineers, well funded, and also receiving great improvements from the community. But somewhat difficult to use :wink:

  • Or it is a ‘freebie’, part of a company’s strategy to introduce users to their ecosystem.

  • The project has a fair number of users

For Fritzing, only the last applies. Someone who is just getting started to learn electronics, or has an electronic side project usually does not want to dive into more than a hundred thousand lines of C++ code.
For Fritzing, the advantage is the direct contact with users. Lots of users. Fritzing is used by teachers and students, makers, curious people, professionals who majored in other disciplines than electronics. This is why an 8 Euro service fee works.

The more people I can get into the boat with this, the better the chances of keeping the price low and increasing the development speed.
So, when using the Fritzing sources, please take this into account. Initiatives like the support for payments by FlatHub, or even a SnapStore with micropayments could be a great way to support applications like Fritzing, but we are not yet there.

Greetings, Kjell

1 Like

Thanks for the response!

There are several reasons why we currently don’t prefer GitHub. For example, a single CI run could easily cost more than $10 there. From version 0.9.10 to 1.0.0 we had roughly five to ten thousand CI runs.

The GitHub free tier provides 2000 CI minutes per month for public repos, unless these 5 to 10 thousand CI runs are taking a large amount of time, this should be enough without being charged.

Others are, that a lot of communication happens over the ‘coffee machine’ ,phone, email. This is nothing new, it is how we work since four years.

This is fine, I just don’t see why there’s no public development communication channel. Even if you don’t want to use GitHub, Discord, Discourse, or any of the more modern alternatives to this, why not have a mailing list if you prefer email? And I don’t think anyone will mind if you have additional in-person or over the phone conversations.

Regarding the rest of the explanation, I have no issue with the model of providing the source code for free and having a paid release build for download to support the developers. But I believe that open-source projects should be developed in the open. I don’t see how doing that would reduce your funding, as the latest stable release is already available, so anyone who doesn’t want to pay is already building from there, and I don’t think this would change if development happened in the open. Please let me know if I’m missing something there though. Personally, I don’t feel comfortable funding an open-source project with the current model, but if the development happened in the open I wouldn’t mind donating as I have for many other open-source projects. But maybe I’m in the minority there.

Anyways, thanks for maintaining this project, I know it’s a lot of work. I hope there’s a way to make the development more open while still keeping it financially feasible.

1 Like

Thanks for the explanation @KjellM. No complains here about the 8€ fee (more than happy to pay) but, the same as @gsgx, I share with him the idea that

and also that more people should be on-boarded for the long term longevity of the project, that may require a different strategy/focus/rethinking on what’s primordial right now (I’m not sure it is “increasing the development speed”). I actually tried to find-out how to get involved, but everything in that regard is unclear, obscure or plainly obsolete.

If CI is the problem within github, remove it and use it just as a repository, or move to other platform, but keep it up-to date, unless you’re changing (or planning to) the model (as you mentioned, “GPL by choice”, ¿?). Please let us know, I’m getting concerned, like @gsgx, about it.

Please, don’t get me wrong, I admire your courage for taking in the task, and I’m very grateful too, just worried about this last “move”. I would prefer a more open dialog and clear statement as to what/when/where.

Best regards

1 Like

Are there any news about this yet?


1 Like

Any news? We are still waiting.

Indeed, there is nowhere, to date, any source code repository for version 1.0 to download. I don’t think they will even make it available. Of course, this is just a suggestion, but I’d like to say straight away that new versions are no longer “open source”. I fully understand that they need resources to continue operating because today everything has an expense, but to say that Fritzing is still opensource, unfortunately this statement is not true. Just say: we will no longer make the source code available, get your latest version of Fritzing…

Realmente, não existe em nenhum lugar, até a presente data, qualquer repositório do código fonte da versão 1.0 para baixar. Acredito que nem irão disponibilizar. Claro, isso é apenas uma sugestão, mas acharia melhor dizer de uma vez que as novas versões não são mais “opensource”. Entendo perfeitamente que precisam de recursos para continuar operando pq hoje tudo tem um gasto, mas dizer que o Fritzing ainda é opensource, infelizmente essa afirmação não é verdadeira. Apenas digam: não iremos mais disponibilizar o código fonte, adquiram sua versão mais atual do Fritzing…

I think the repository is up to date since last week, it’s just not tagged as 1.0.0. Check the development branch in GitHub. There are three commits after setting the 1.0.0rc2 string and I don’t think there were too many changes from rc2 to 1.0.0.