Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: (no subject)

[Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US)]

> -Original Message-
> From: License-discuss [mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org] On 
> Behalf Of Tzeng, Nigel H.
> Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2017 12:10 PM
> To: license-discuss@opensource.org
> Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: (no subject)
> 
> Cem,
> 
> I think I’ve mentioned this in the past but GOSS needs not be bazaar style 
> open development.  Cathedral development that simply open
> sources the resulting product still has tremendous value to the community.
> 
> From that perspective CLAs, and dealing with external contributions are a 
> non-issue because there aren’t any and open sourcing is much
> lower risk.  All contributions are done by USG employees or contractors.  All 
> the project looks at are JIRA issues and determines if any
> warrant any internal action.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Nigel

I see your point with cathedral-style development, but I think that 
bazaar-style development results in far more progress in a shorter time frame 
and at lower cost.  In addition, the Government has done cathedral-style 
development for a while now, and (in my opinion), it is time for it to move 
forwards towards the bazaar.  We're not yet at the point that we can just let 
go of everything and avoid CLAs altogether, but there may come a point in time 
when we can.  At least, I hope that time will come.

Thanks,
Cem Karan


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@opensource.org
https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss

Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: (no subject)

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

Cem, 

I think I’ve mentioned this in the past but GOSS needs not be bazaar style open 
development.  Cathedral development that simply open sources the resulting 
product still has tremendous value to the community.  

From that perspective CLAs, and dealing with external contributions are a 
non-issue because there aren’t any and open sourcing is much lower risk.  All 
contributions are done by USG employees or contractors.  All the project looks 
at are JIRA issues and determines if any warrant any internal action.

Regards,

Nigel

On 9/5/17, 9:12 AM, "License-discuss on behalf of Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY 
RDECOM ARL (US)"  wrote:

> -Original Message-
> 

This is also important for Open Source in general; large organizations tend 
to 
protect themselves from being sued by curtailing activities that they see 
as 
unnecessary and risky.  Open Source has not yet proven itself to the upper 
levels of the Government as being necessary; that means that for some 
managers 
it will be viewed as unnecessary.  If there are risks associated with it as 
well, then there will be a push to end Open Source within the Government. 
CLAs help reduce risk, which may give Government Open Source the time it 
needs 
to prove itself as necessary to upper level managers.
 

___
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@opensource.org
https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss