Poll: Why does the loose development process of OS work?

[Oliver Zeigermann <ol...@gmail.com>]

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: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: Poll: Why does the loose development process of OS work?

[Roland Weber <ht...@dubioso.net>]

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: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org

RE: Poll: Why does the loose development process of OS work?

[db...@baybroadband.net]

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" <ol...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tue, July 18, 2006 10:16 am
To: "Jakarta General List" <ge...@jakarta.apache.org>
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: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: Poll: Why does the loose development process of OS work?

[Sandy McArthur <sa...@apache.org>]

On 7/18/06, Oliver Zeigermann <ol...@gmail.com> 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: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org

Re: Poll: Why does the loose development process of OS work?

[Oliver Zeigermann <ol...@gmail.com>]

Hey, again!

Thanks for all those interesting views :)

I will let you know onced I have finished the article.

Cheers

Oliver

2006/7/18, Oliver Zeigermann <ol...@gmail.com>:
> 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: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org