Re: Poll: Why does the loose development process of OS work?
Hi Oliver, > Why does the loose development process of OS work? I think you should distinguish between OSS on private time and OS done by companies. I guess there's much more hierarchy in the latter case. My first answer to the question is a negative one: no other process could work. Some people are willing to contribute to OSS on their own time and schedule, but hardly anyone would agree to fit into the lower levels of a hierarchy for fun. > Or more in detail: Why are almost all commercial projects organized as > a strict hierarchy while most OS projects work with a loose > organisation or even none at all. Commercial projects are organized in strict hierarchies because the job needs to get done in time, and somebody has to take responsibility for that. OSS is ready "when it's ready", and there you have the luxury of waiting until somebody is willing to take the responsibility and drive things forward. > Additionally, roles are always > switched on demand. This is something that would never be done in a > classically organized project. Don't know what "roles" exactly you mean. I've switched from developer to more architectural roles in professional development projects. I wouldn't switch to a project manager role because I don't like to track MS Project plans, but within my skills I'm comfortable to do what I see needs to be done. If that's development, or architecture, or mentoring, or teaching, or writing documentation, I hardly care. As long as there's minimal paper work ;-) In a commercial environment it is of course easier to hide behind your job description. Cover your ass, don't take responsibility you don't have to so you won't get blamed if things fail, don't be the messenger of bad news, and so on. OSS on private time means you care about the project and want it to succeed, so you're more likely to do what you feel should be done, rather than see the project go down. There may also be an issue with careers - in OSS you're less likely to meet someone up the hierarchy who doesn't want to let you pass. Or maybe I was just lucky so far. cheers, Roland - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Poll: Why does the loose development process of OS work?
I frankly think os projects tend to be better because the developers on os projects are generally better and more interested then developers in a company. -Original Message- From: "Oliver Zeigermann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tue, July 18, 2006 10:16 am To: "Jakarta General List" Subject: Poll: Why does the loose development process of OS work? Hi, folks! I currently plan an article on Open Source Software development. What I would like from you are voices about my central question: Why does the loose development process of OS work? Or more in detail: Why are almost all commercial projects organized as a strict hierarchy while most OS projects work with a loose organisation or even none at all. Additionally, roles are always switched on demand. This is something that would never be done in a classically organized project. What do you think? Opinions? Thoughts? Am I even on the wrong track? Thanks in advance! Oliver - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Poll: Why does the loose development process of OS work?
On 7/18/06, Oliver Zeigermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, folks! I currently plan an article on Open Source Software development. What I would like from you are voices about my central question: Why does the loose development process of OS work? Or more in detail: Why are almost all commercial projects organized as a strict hierarchy while most OS projects work with a loose organisation or even none at all. Additionally, roles are always switched on demand. This is something that would never be done in a classically organized project. What do you think? Opinions? Thoughts? Am I even on the wrong track? (warning: generalizations and possibly under cooked ideas ahead) I don't think OS development works any more than traditional closed source development. There are as many more failed (stalled) projects on SourceForge than successful ones. In both worlds failures rarely make the news (because they are so common) and proponents tend to have a selective memory about failures that don't further their motives. I think project success is based on some fuzzy formula consisting of passion, persistence, work and market demand. The difference between open and closed source development is how those elements exist. In the close source projects usually have to create the passion, persistence, and work elements by using momentary incentives. In open source development those elements occur naturally somehow. As for the hierarchical nature of closed source vs organic nature of open source, I think that open source is more hierarchical than most would like to admit. It's still less hierarchical than a commercial environment but it exists. Apache clearly has a structure. With in a project there is usually one person or a small number of people who are most passionate about it and lead the project forward. Since open source usually doesn't have the momentary incentives available to create passion, persistence, and work out of less involved people the people leading a project tend to downplay the hierarchical differences so they don't run the volunteers off. Where open source is different from closed source is the controlling entities of closed source derive their control directly or indirectly from ownership. In the open source, controlling entities got their either by longevity with the project or by nomination from others on the project. All that said, development doesn't have to be either open or closed. There are many degrees in between of open-ness. JBoss and MySQL are the first two examples I can think of where the demand for the project has been enough that they were able to convert that demand into money like a closed source project and then reapply those funds to maintain control over the projects. -- Sandy McArthur "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Poll: Why does the loose development process of OS work?
Hi, folks! I currently plan an article on Open Source Software development. What I would like from you are voices about my central question: Why does the loose development process of OS work? Or more in detail: Why are almost all commercial projects organized as a strict hierarchy while most OS projects work with a loose organisation or even none at all. Additionally, roles are always switched on demand. This is something that would never be done in a classically organized project. What do you think? Opinions? Thoughts? Am I even on the wrong track? Thanks in advance! Oliver - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]