This initial draft eventually morphed in the following twin documents:
CommunitySourceDevelopmentModel
CommunitySourceAndOpenSourceDevelopmentModelsCompared
Community Source is the name given to an development model that attempts to merge the closed development practices of closed source software with the open development practices of open source software foundations such as The Apache Software Foundation, The GNOME Foundation, The Eclipse Foundaiton and The Debian Foundation.
1. comparison of community source and open source
1.1. Similarities
- both release code under an OSI approved licence
- clear IPR management policies and practices
1.2. Differences
- All community members are not equal in community source
- Some participants are contractually obliged to provide agreed resources
2. Discussion of the claimed advantages/disadvantages of Community Source
![/!\](/_static/modern/img/alert.png "/!\")
Edit conflict - your version:
2.1. Similarities
- both release code under an OSI approved licence
- clear IPR management policies and practices
2.2. Differences
- All community members are not equal in community source
- Some participants are contractually obliged to provide agreed resources
3. Discussion of the claimed advantages/disadvantages of Community Source
- End of edit conflict
[FIXME: in this section I have listed what I, Ross Gardler, consider to be (come of) the disadvantages of community source, I have made no attempt to understand and represent the advantages of community source - we need to balance all this up]
- having some members more equal than others discourages "voluntary" contributions
- interested parties need not be contractually obliged to contribute, if the project is going in the right direction, they will contribute
- having made significant contributions organisations expect to have an ongoing control over the project, even when no longer under contractual obligation to contribute
- this fosters bad feeling between those who have contributed and those who come in late in order to participate "for free"
- providing ongoing decision making power to no longer contributing organisations fosters more bad feeling
- project management is stuck between a r"rock and a hard place"
- limiting access to resources to the consortium who form the community limits the potential for wider buy-in and thus limits community development in the early stages
- Edit conflict - other version:
4. The history of open source
- Edit conflict - your version:
5. The history of open source
- End of edit conflict
- Sakai stated life as community source and moved to open source
- Kuali appears to have learnt from the problems encountered in sakai and starts projjects as community source but with the express intention of moving to a more open model
- Eclipse struggled to move from closed to community source then on to open source
- Edit conflict - other version:
6. A closed community source model
- some commercial companies have a community source model which provides access to the source code, but it is not free or open
7. Conclusions
- Edit conflict - your version:
8. A closed community source model
- some commercial companies have a community source model which provides access to the source code, but it is not free or open
9. Conclusions
- End of edit conflict
- ???
10. Resources
- Edit conflict - other version:
- Edit conflict - your version:
- End of edit conflict
[FIXME: I, Ross Gardler, have deliberately weighted these resources in favour of Community Source since my own experience, and therefore the content I have written above comes from the open source world. Eventually we need to balance this up]
