I was kind of hoping this was some form of parody/sarcasm, but it appears not. The open source development model does not address this in any meaningful fashion

I was kind of hoping this was some form of parody/sarcasm, but it appears not. The open source development model does not address this in any meaningful fashion. You are suggesting that the solution to communication problems is to force everybody to have complete knowledge of everything. That definitely doesn't scale. Remember the description given of the bazaar is "a great babbling bazaar of differing agendas and approaches out of which a coherent and stable system could seemingly emerge only by a succession of miracles" which turns out to be true a lot of the time. Large open source projects don't produce stable systems without some form of additional social order imposed. They become less stable as they grow larger, and either someone notices and attempts to impose various forms of non-bazaar-like order (as happened to the linux kernel, for example), or the project fails/becomes a mess (i will avoid slagging on projects here :P) Beyond that, the way open source addresses the problems listed in the article is by ignoring them. That is by design. "Differences between the two styles of development, according to Bar and Fogel, are in general the handling (and creation) of bug reports and feature requests, and the constraints under which the programmers are working.[2] In closed-source software development, the programmers are often spending a lot of time dealing with and creating bug reports, as well as handling feature requests. This time is spent on creating and prioritizing further development plans. This leads to part of the development team spending a lot of time on these issues, and not on the actual development. Also, in closed-source projects, the development teams must often work under management-related constraints (such as deadlines, budgets, etc.) that interfere with technical issues of the software." IE In closed source systems, time is spent thinking, planning, and prioritizing. Also, fixing bugs and handling feature requests. The bazaar says "don't do that, doing that takes away from focusing on technical goodness" This is true. The strict bazaar model prioritizes the technical goodness over everything. Unfortunately, technical goodness does not create good products. Thinking, planning, and prioritization do :). See, e.g., cascade of attention deficit teenagers (https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html). This is also why you rarely, if ever see straight bazaar models behind successful consumer-facing products. Good products require careful coordinated curation and choice. You do see straight bazaar models occasionally in infrastructure, but even there, not for large projects. If you want to see the bazaar method in practice to products, you don't have to look any further than the huge mess that was (and is) linux desktops - it is only by moving away from strict bazaar models that they have made any progress at all over the past two decades.