by wadechandler - 2007-06-19 06:34
by wadechandler - 2007-06-19 06:36
by wadechandler - 2007-06-19 06:39
by wfvoogd - 2006-07-27 00:54
by peterd - 2006-07-25 20:02
Geez, how many projects do you guys contribute to? Supportive employers, perhaps? Independently wealthy?
When you consider the sort of sharks who patrol software development waters, cozying up to Sun or IBM a little doesn't seem so bad.
I'd want to be careful about the nature of the project as well as its licensing model, and the condition of its code base - some projects with their origins in private development look like they'll need a lot of refactoring before they become survivors.
by joconner - 2006-07-23 18:50
by invalidname - 2006-07-24 02:05
by joconner - 2006-07-24 07:42
by rickcarson - 2006-07-23 16:58
I've thought about contributing to projects like JBoss and Shiira which are tied strongly to one company.
In the case of JBoss I don't like their strong arm tactics, which seem to boil down to "only we are allowed to make money from this". So if they are going to be pricks about it, why should I help them make money?*
In the case of Shiira it was 'open source' in that the source code is available for 1.2.2, but 2.0 is in beta and there doesn't seem to be a way to get at the source for 2.0 and play around with it. So there is a kind of 'lag' factor, which discourages getting involved. I mean I could look at 1.2.2 and do bug fixes or extensions, but who is to say that those bugs won't be fixed in the next version anyway? So why bother? Whereas if the source for the beta was available, then I could look at it and figure out if someone was going to 'scratch the same itch' as me.
*This is I guess a selfish approach. A true OS fanatic would say that by making JBoss better for me (and everyone else) I improve my own situation, and everyone else benefitting is just the cool side effect of OS. But in this case to borrow a concept from economics, there are 'goods' that are perfect 'substitutes' for JBoss. In which case, if JBoss doesn't do what I want, then I just use something different to solve my immediate problem.
Which raises a question of why then do we have competing projects (eg Netbeans vs Eclipse) where they spend a significant chunk of time duplicating each other's feature set. I think the key to that is in the word 'competing' and that it is an ego thing (complete with chest thumping and yodeling).
Now to show how this ties back to the topic, perhaps there are levels of involvement in OS. On the first level I might be 'scratching an itch', where my level of commitment might not be that deep. On the second level I might move beyond that, to the point of getting emotionally involved in the success of the project, into a more committed approach to improving the product in general (the ego has become the itch that needs scratching).
I think it is harder to be 'egotistically' involved with a project where a single company is making a lot of money off your efforts, because it is easy to perhaps feel that you are missing out. Whereas for a low level of commitment it might not such an issue.
by pholthuizen - 2006-07-22 21:10
by jezuch - 2006-07-21 12:56
by tonioc - 2006-07-21 09:39
by prime21 - 2006-07-21 09:04
by hiteshlad - 2006-07-21 07:26
by ae6rt - 2006-07-21 06:48
by bharathch - 2006-07-21 05:44
by ilazarte - 2006-07-21 05:25
Your use of this web site or any of its content or software indicates your agreement to be bound by these Terms of Participation.
Copyright © 2014, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Oracle and Java are registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners.