Here is a link to the graphic that is in this e-mail...
http://www.kaliyasblogs.net/images/OpenSource.tiff
On Jul 14, 2007, at 2:36 PM, Kaliya Hamlin wrote:
Follow up.
I was asked what does 'the right to fork' mean.
Perhaps a step back and understanding what they are forking
(dividing in two copies and code base diverges).
I am not a coder - I have worked with communities and people who do
code for several years know. My description is somewhat of a
simplification but accurate enough for the purposes here.
Open Source Code means that the Source Code is distributed with
the binary (the part that makes the computer go) When you purchase
proprietary software - you only get the binary (you don't get to
see the 'human readable' code that if you could read it - you could
change and improve it')
So when a [source] code base forks it means that code 'splits' and
two different versions evolve out of one ... like two branches of a
tree that have the same trunk.
Forking although a 'right' is NOT encouraged and can be very
disruptive .... it is better to have one community of 1000 people
working on one code base then two communities of 500 working on two
separate code bases...
The right to Fork creates a powerful dynamic tension that alows for
cohesion but also requires the leaders in a community strive for
inclusivity and doing the right thing for the whole. It forces
responsiveness amongst the community 'leader(s)' (who are that
because of their aquisition of community respect and their merit in
coding and decision making (code either works or it doesn't, it is
either fast or it is not - there are metrics that merrit is judged
by that are not just subjective).
This is a good article on the meatball wiki about what the Right to
Fork is - it also puts the role of benevolent dictator in context.
http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?RightToFork
So you can see why I say it is similar philosophically but quite
different practically.
Open Standards ARE different then Open Source... mainly because
they are about adoption and interoperability.
They are more like rail road tracks having the same gauge and the
electric plugs on our walls all having the same outlet (at least
with in a country (or having the same voltage (at least within a
continent). Or Containers for container-ships beings the same (few)
standard size(s) [packets of information that travel on the
interent are all standardized - you could think of containers on
containterships as "physical packets" that contain goods while
packets on the internet contain information]
In the Technical world innovating in this area involved a lot of
conversations with a lot of players and getting to consenses and
implementation....
FORKING doesn't work in Open Standards - you can't just build your
own electric system with your own voltage and plug... You have to
figure out how to cooperate on the base infrastructure stuff and
then innovate on top of that. Standards evolve....new ones emerge
as technology changes....Here are some technical standards
outlined - http://www.openstandards.net/viewOSnet3C.jsp
Guess what... I have found that Open Space Technology is a good
method to getting the issues surfaced - concerns addressed and the
social 'lubrication' needed to get to agreements that mean the
adoption of Open Standards.
On Jul 14, 2007, at 11:29 AM, Kaliya Hamlin wrote:
Sigh,
Human communities do this for good reason.
It works.
Everyone is not 'equal' in the sense that we all have different
experience and different knowledge. Some people are naturally
skilled at holding space and others well they haven't learned it
yet. Newbies to a practice, technique or skill and having an
arrogance of 'sameness' with practitioners who have been doing it
for years.
Some how the 'groovy' green people (in the Spiral Dynamics sense)
have this belief their is no expertise, no years of skill
development, no level of maturity that comes from doing something
a long time and that the respect, knowledge and reputation that
someone might have because of this legitimate experience some how
'wreaks of "hierarchy"' and that all hierarchy is BAD.
There are important issues in our society around the abuse of
'rank' and having power over people because of positional
authority that is abused...these are real issues. Robert Fuller
has spent a lot of time thinking about this issue and has two
books about the subject. http://www.breakingranks.net/ He does
not say that 'rank' and hierarchy are bad he says abuse within
this paradigm is bad.
I work a lot in Open Source and Open Standards technical
communities. It took me a while to get it but these 'open'
communities function on the scale they do because of repetitional
meritocratic hierarchy. To read more on the functioning of open
source communities read - Open Sources, OPen Sources 2.0 and The
Success of Open Source.
Open Space Technology is fundamentally different then these to
community practices - it is about taking the agenda away from the
'organizer' how ever the organizer of the event still creates the
invitation and invites the people and creates the space that is
possible for good things to happen. The Law of two feet is like
the right to fork... there are similarities at a philosophical
level...at a practical level... OST is not trying to build an
operating system or have 100,000 all collaborate on the same thing
- it doesn't 'need' the kind of hierarchy that technical
communities do.
Having eldership and respect for experience is not a bad thing. If
this must be called 'heirarchy' so be it...I think it is legitmate
- and perhaps needs a different name.
If it means new voices are shut out. Well perhaps some reflection
on the culture that makes people think that - perhaps some
introspection is needed to address that problem. They are not the
same problem.
=kaliya
On Jul 14, 2007, at 11:07 AM, Raffi Aftandelian wrote:
Greetings friends and colleagues--
Harrison you wrote:
"The other day I got a note which said in part, "I was surprised to
find out that there was a hierarchy in the OST community and
everyone having
a specific place to hold, voices are not equal and politics
prevails in
certain circuits Just the same old same old... I'm not sure this
is what
you envisioned with OST." I have no idea what the specific
circumstances
were, and less interest in finding out. But presuming that we
have the
creeping tentacles of elitism sneaking in - a good dose of the
Law of Two
Feet and a clear recognition of the Universal License of Open Space
(everybody has one by birth) should do the trick. Or something."
I would love to hear more from the person who wrote about
hierarchy in the
OST community. What is meant by "hierarchy" here?
Isn't there hierarchy everywhere? Is it a bad thing? The question
is what
kind of hierarchy do we have in the OST community? Is it a
hierarchy that
feeds us, strengthens us? And how do we choose to engage with it
as a
community? Do we create the spaces to talk about the power
differentials
within our practitioner community in a way that, well, builds
more capacity
within us?
Quakers, for example, acknowledge that voices are not equal
within the life
of a Monthly Meeting. They have the concept of "weightiness" or a
"weighty
Friend." In other words, these are the elders within the Quaker
world.
And doesn't the OST world have its elders and sages?
I, too, have heard (and thought) that the OST community is the "same
old...," - heck, some of that "same oldness" shows up on the list
from time
to time- *and* I do not know of a more generous, welcoming,
inspiring
facilitation community. We either choose to engage with the OST
community as
it is, or...well exercise the law of two feet.
Raffi
*
*
==========================================================
[email protected]
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of [email protected]:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
Kaliya - Identity Woman
[email protected]
http://www.unconference.net
http://www.identitywoman.net
skype:identitywoman
Y!:earthwaters
AIM:[email protected]
510 472-9069 (bay area)
415 425 1136 (on the road)
* * ==========================================================
[email protected] ------------------------------ To
subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of
[email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/
archives/oslist.html To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST
FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
Kaliya - Identity Woman
[email protected]
http://www.unconference.net
http://www.identitywoman.net
skype:identitywoman
Y!:earthwaters
AIM:[email protected]
510 472-9069 (bay area)
415 425 1136 (on the road)
* * ==========================================================
[email protected] ------------------------------ To
subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of
[email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/
archives/oslist.html To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST
FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
Kaliya - Identity Woman
[email protected]
http://www.unconference.net
http://www.identitywoman.net
skype:identitywoman
Y!:earthwaters
AIM:[email protected]
510 472-9069 (bay area)
415 425 1136 (on the road)
*
*
==========================================================
[email protected]
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of [email protected]:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
