Thank you for being open to taking in feedback, understanding the concerns and for the interest in collaboratively finding ways to make things work for both sides. Working with a truly decentralized network has its challenges, but I think groups that have decided to listen and adjust to address things have been extremely happy that they've done so. The community has criteria but it greatly rewards those willing to meet the criteria.
Hearing you will be transitioning to a DAO is awesome, kudos for that. Same with transitioning to open source.
From my perspective, anything the DHF pays for has to be delivered as open source. It has to be done with the purpose of supporting decentralization. Typically this includes enabling and supporting others in running nodes for the service, so that there are multiple parties doing it, and anyone can run a node. This gives us great security in both using the service and in its continuation. Since the community pays for it, there would also typically be no fees, or greatly reduced fees.
But there is a lot to be said for flexibility. There have been models where a group develops software, it begins to be used by the community (for a fee, etc.), and then the group makes a DHF proposal for making the software open source.
There can be other models as well.
Btw, I think you have a mistake in the other two people's usernames that you tagged.