Replace Mixpanel: open-source

Q: Where can we audit the source?

GitHub: `github.com/respectlytics`. Each SDK has its own repository with source, tests, CI configuration, and release tags. The server lives in a separate repo with the same conventions.

▸Example Mixpanel call (the "before")

swift Respectlytics

import Mixpanel

let mixpanel = Mixpanel.mainInstance()

// Identifies the user — distinct_id becomes joinable to email forever:
mixpanel.identify(distinctId: userId)
mixpanel.people.set(properties: [
    "$email": email,
    "$name": fullName,
    "plan": "pro",
])
mixpanel.track(event: "Paywall Purchase", properties: ["value": price])

Closed-source analytics SDKs require you to trust vendor claims about behaviour. Open-source SDKs let your security team verify those claims from source. For regulated industries this is often a procurement-gating requirement. Respectlytics's SDKs are MIT-licensed and fully open; the server is AGPL-3.0.

☑Remove Mixpanel cleanly

1
Remove pod 'Mixpanel' from Podfile
2
Remove implementation 'com.mixpanel.android:mixpanel-android:...' from build.gradle.kts
3
Remove mixpanel-react-native from package.json or mixpanel_flutter: from pubspec.yaml
4
Delete any Mixpanel.mainInstance().people.set(...) or identify() calls — those are the people-profile entry points
5
Replace mixpanel.track(...) call sites with Respectlytics.track("event_name")
6
Delete the Mixpanel project (or revoke the project token) in the Mixpanel admin once you've confirmed no more events arrive
7
If you used Mixpanel-driven cohort exports for marketing, plan the cutover to whatever replaces those flows

⇋Mixpanel vs Respectlytics — open-source sdk + server

	Mixpanel	Respectlytics
SDK source publicly available	— see tool note above	Yes (MIT)
Server source publicly available	— typically no	Yes (AGPL-3.0)
Reproducible builds from source	— varies	Yes (CI publishes from same commit)
Fork-and-modify allowed	— varies by license	Yes
Public commit history	— typically no	Yes (GitHub)

❓Frequently asked questions

Where can we audit the source?

GitHub: github.com/respectlytics. Each SDK has its own repository with source, tests, CI configuration, and release tags. The server lives in a separate repo with the same conventions.

Are the published binaries reproducible from source?

Yes — CI builds use deterministic build commands. The artifacts published to CocoaPods / SPM / Maven Central / npm / pub.dev are produced by the same pipeline that runs against each commit. Reproducible builds are a goal we test against; report any discrepancy as an issue.

Can we modify the SDK and ship our fork?

Yes — MIT permits modification and redistribution with attribution. Many enterprises fork to adjust logging, add internal tracing, or vendor the SDK into their build.

Why MIT for SDK and AGPL for server?

Standard split for source-available SaaS (GitLab, Sentry, MinIO, Plausible). MIT on the SDK maximises consumer freedom — your app picks up the dependency without obligation. AGPL on the server prevents competing closed-source SaaS forks while allowing internal self-hosting freely.

⇢Related migration guides

Replace Mixpanel: no att prompt Same tool, No ATT prompt Replace Mixpanel: no pii collected Same tool, No PII collected Replace Mixpanel: no phi collected Same tool, No PHI collected Replace Mixpanel: 5-field event schema Same tool, 5-field event schema Replace Mixpanel: ram-only event queue Same tool, RAM-only event queue Replace Mixpanel: fewer third-party sdks Same tool, Fewer third-party SDKs Replace Mixpanel: smaller app binary Same tool, Smaller app binary Replace Mixpanel: faster cold start Same tool, Faster cold start Replace Mixpanel: eu data residency Same tool, EU data residency Replace Mixpanel: self-hosted deployment Same tool, Self-hosted deployment Replace Firebase Analytics: open-source sdk + server Same outcome, Firebase Analytics Replace Google Analytics for Firebase: open-source sdk + server Same outcome, Google Analytics for Firebase

Replace Mixpanel with an open-source analytics stack