The majority of open source software doesn't make sense to be used via a docker image and the definition for open source needs more than just source code access
You may find this pedantic but it really is an important distinction. I've had licensed access to source code that was not open source and very restrictive through various jobs in the past (not talking about code I worked on but business agreements that included access to source code for audits and stuff)
Having access to the source code does not necessarily give access to use, share, modify. The two biggest requirements for open source beyond just the actual source code is the ability to modify and redistribute. Source-available software is NOT good enough
So as someone who is part of the problem with my PirateWeather.net API, I feel this, and wish there was a better way. The issue is that the cloud makes so many things possible (in my case, downloading and processing 500 GB/day of data), which is awesome, but also can’t just be wide open, since the bill would be outrageous. One thing I’m toying with is using email addresses as an API key with some sort of verification process afterwards, since this might be easier for people to use and still prevent abuse. Long term, the way forward is to reduce download and processing requirements to make self hosting feasible. It’s a tricky problem to solve though.
personally, I think something like yours that does a lot of processing on your end is a different beast. I can see why you would want to put something like an api key in front to prevent some abuse.
Had this recently with Facebox. You can't even get a key anymore so it's completely useless. I can't find any alternatives either so I guess I'm just fucked
If it's truly open source you can always host it yourself. But if you want the convenience of using someone else server then you will need an API key and pay if you reach a certain usage limit.