3 ms·

The question that intrigues me quite a while. I suspect that there are types of projects / product areas that especially benefit from being OpenSource. What ar

The question that intrigues me quite a while. I suspect that there are types of projects / product areas that especially benefit from being OpenSource. What are these areas? Yet my mental model considers the following development business models: * OpenSource/Bazaar - everyone can do whatever they want, without much of supervision. Like famous NPM registry. * OpenSource/Glassdoor - only selected "maintainers" can actually do the development, the rest, on the other side of the glass, can only look and suggest something (if they have loud enough voice). Like Linux development. * ClosedSource - internally that is also using either Bazaar or Glassdoor model - it is just auditorium is smaller and more focused - limited by the organization itself and its clients. Like Windows and its all major customers, states and agencies. How do these models correlate with product areas?

rectang 8y ago
"Open Source" is a development methodology. It is compatible with various business models. One of the most popular is "open core", where a product is available under an open source license but a company makes add-ons available under proprietary licenses for a fee. There are also various governance models for open source projects. A company can maintain ultimate control over the direction over a product (e.g. Docker, the Go programming language, ...). Or the project may be governed by its contributors and may have various rules for contributors being offered a governance stake. ("BDFL" or Benevolent Dictator For Life where 1 person has final say, a "PMC" or Project Management Committee where members join by invitation, etc.)
- c-smile 8y ago
  Thanks for the clarification but that's pretty much what I just said. Not sure about this though: > "Open Source" is a development methodology. Development methodology is one of these as far I understand: https://www.synopsys.com/blogs/software-security/top-4-software-development-methodologies/ https://www.synopsys.com/blogs/software-security/top-4-softw... In any case my question/suspicion still stands: far not all types of software projects are fit or benefit from being OpenSource.
  - mindcrime 8y ago
    In my experience, when most people talk about "software development methodologies" they mean something like "the kinds of things captured by labels like Scrum, XP, Crystal, RUP, AUP, waterfall, etc." In that sense, I wouldn't say that "open source" has traditionally been thought of as a "development methodology", but by the same token, I can see how it would be fair to refer to it that way. Maybe it would be better to say "open source is a development philosophy" or "open source is a development approach" or something, but I actually think it fits as a "development methodology" with the caveat that it's not just a development methodology. For a lot of people, (myself included) it's more of an ideology or even a way of life. Anyway, there are companies that actively talk about running projects as "internal open source" and in that sense, I would argue that referring to "open source" as a "development methodology" is reasonable.
catern 8y ago
The usual term for what you call "glassdoor" development is "cathedral". The original use of the term "bazaar" to refer to software development, in fact, was to describe Linux. It's interesting how perspectives change...

rectang 8y ago

"Open Source" is a development methodology. It is compatible with various business models. One of the most popular is "open core", where a product is available under an open source license but a company makes add-ons available under proprietary licenses for a fee. There are also various governance models for open source projects. A company can maintain ultimate control over the direction over a product (e.g. Docker, the Go programming language, ...). Or the project may be governed by its contributors and may have various rules for contributors being offered a governance stake. ("BDFL" or Benevolent Dictator For Life where 1 person has final say, a "PMC" or Project Management Committee where members join by invitation, etc.)

c-smile 8y ago
Thanks for the clarification but that's pretty much what I just said. Not sure about this though: > "Open Source" is a development methodology. Development methodology is one of these as far I understand: https://www.synopsys.com/blogs/software-security/top-4-software-development-methodologies/ https://www.synopsys.com/blogs/software-security/top-4-softw... In any case my question/suspicion still stands: far not all types of software projects are fit or benefit from being OpenSource.
- mindcrime 8y ago
  In my experience, when most people talk about "software development methodologies" they mean something like "the kinds of things captured by labels like Scrum, XP, Crystal, RUP, AUP, waterfall, etc." In that sense, I wouldn't say that "open source" has traditionally been thought of as a "development methodology", but by the same token, I can see how it would be fair to refer to it that way. Maybe it would be better to say "open source is a development philosophy" or "open source is a development approach" or something, but I actually think it fits as a "development methodology" with the caveat that it's not just a development methodology. For a lot of people, (myself included) it's more of an ideology or even a way of life. Anyway, there are companies that actively talk about running projects as "internal open source" and in that sense, I would argue that referring to "open source" as a "development methodology" is reasonable.

catern 8y ago

The usual term for what you call "glassdoor" development is "cathedral". The original use of the term "bazaar" to refer to software development, in fact, was to describe Linux. It's interesting how perspectives change...