I concede that it is not precisely OSS. But if I tell someone that it is source-available, they will expect some kind of license restriction for any use. If I tell someone OSS, they will expect mostly what the Sentry license entails, unless they are a competitor, in which case I really don't care what they think.
I wish there were a popular term that conveys exactly how Sentry license works. But, there isn't - so I think it's fair to say open source, maybe as a general term. I'll change it from OSS to open source
Billionaires and corporations can hire teams of people to work for them full-time. You, likely, can hire one or two (or zero!). Not to make it personal.
Just like codex or opencode provide strong oss implementations of the core agent loop, our ambition (not achieved! hoping this is a solid start) is to provide a solid oss implementation of the context updating loop, memory, basic database + a backend sync layer. And evals + continual learning + gepa optimization.
Just like everyone can write their own agent, yet many opt for codex/claude code sdk/opencode, we think that at some point in our journey, many will also opt for standard implementations of these patterns, for projects big or small.
Realistically, though, the case for a standardized environment grows a lot stronger when you have multi-agent, permissioned actions, and generally just a lot more state than what you can get away with using only opencode + some glue. Insofar as big teams have ambitious products, they might be more likely to try it