community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexei Fedotov <>
Subject Re: Passion and vigilance in open source
Date Wed, 23 Sep 2015 15:12:41 GMT
... and thanks to the topic starter for the great topic.
23.09.2015 17:48 пользователь "Jim Jagielski" <> написал:

> Yeah, that's pretty much the way I'm looking at it. To me though, just
> as gravity is what pulls the pendulum back down to its mid-point, for
> Open Source, it's the "true Open Source" community (or, if you prefer,
> the "real" one) which acts as gravity, and pulls the pendulum back
> to 'b'. But if that real community doesn't exist, then the pendulum
> never swings back.
> As long as we are talking mechanical analogies, one I like to use isn't
> the pendulum but rather the fly-ball governor on a Watt steam engine[1].
> In this case, when the internal temperature gets too high, the spin of
> the governor speeds up, which releases steam and the temp goes down; when
> the internal temperature goes down too low, the spin is slower, and it
> closes a valve which increases pressure and temp... In our case, the
> meritocratic open source governance model is the base operating mode (b)
> whereas a and c are the 2 extremes. Where I see a problem is when (b)
> is no longer considered the "right" or "optimal" mode, and instead
> the default "regulated" mode is set closer to 'a' or 'c'; My point is that
> this set-point can, and *is* controlled but all the players in the
> open source community, but we are in "danger" of 'b' no longer
> being the desired mode simply because those who favor 'b' are no
> longer active in wanting that... We need to ensure that 'b' being
> the correct/right/optimal set-point for "how open source should be"
> is always being "pushed", always being fostered, always being nurtured.
> BTW: Thx for all the comments, this is VERY VERY useful!
> 1.
> > On Sep 23, 2015, at 2:27 AM, Ross Gardler <>
> wrote:
> >
> > I reckon Jim is describing a different kind of pendulum (see my earlier
> essay - sorry I got on a roll with that one).
> >
> > Jim's pendulum is something like:
> >
> > Let a = autocratic open source governance (vendor owned/benevolent
> dictator)
> > Let b = meritocratic open source governance
> > Let c = fully distributed open source governance (GitHub style fork and
> forget - note not all GitHub projects are this style)
> >
> > The interesting thing is that I don't think we are really at point c, I
> think we are really at point a. The numbers point to c but many rock-star
> projects are at point a. I'd argue that this goes hand in hand with my
> argument that open source is currently more about the business model than
> the development model. As with the other pendulum I believe this one will
> swing back towards the center as those companies realize that there is a
> glass ceiling to their growth using that model (if you haven't read Henrik
> Ingo's paper [1] on this you should).
> >
> > Another interesting point about this spectrum is that while (if history
> repeats) there will be a swing past b and towards c this side of the swing
> is much shorter. I guess because any "fork and forget" projects that
> succeed will typically become either an autocratic or meritocratic project
> in order to scale.
> >
> > As with my other pendulum thought experiment I believe we sit at the
> "sensible" place on that spectrum (point b). That isn't today it's the only
> place that can work, but that it is where it works for the Apache Way. I
> think plenty of people still do this for the fun (and education). Speaking
> personally a recent change in my dayjob role means that I'm coding for fun
> again - so that's at least one person going in the opposite direction to
> the one Jim sees is the majority (lucky me!)
> >
> > Ross
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jim Jagielski []
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 7:01 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: Passion and vigilance in open source
> >
> > I would be OK with us getting older and forgetting the child-like wonder
> (but I don't think that's the case; well, we *are* getting older, but not
> forgetting the wonder), IF we were seeing the child-like wonder being
> continued, esp by the next gen.
> >
> > Some see Github as "proof" that the wonder is still there; even if so,
> then it's a different kind of 'wonder' and one which is risky for the
> continuation of open source.
> >
> > Wonder is not being able to fork a project, make some patches, submit a
> bunch of pull requests and then get a handful of them committed upstream...
> That is so.... solitary. The wonder is working *with* and collaborating
> *with* and reaching consensus
> > *with* a group of similarly-minded individuals towards a common goal.
> The wonder is the community. And I think that that is something which is at
> risk.
> >
> > To me, Open Source provided an avenue that allowed coders (and other
> contributors) to finally work together, openly and honestly, transparently
> and meritocractically (if you get my meaning); it fostered sharing, but not
> by letting someone share our toys by playing with them by themselves in
> some corner of the sandbox. It was about us all sharing the toys to build a
> great sand castle all together in that sandbox, when before we couldn't.
> >
> > Are people doing it for fun? Are people seeing the joy and wonder in our
> eyes? Or are people doing it just because "that's what I get paid to do"?
> >
> > Good questions. Not simple answers :)
> >
> >> On Sep 22, 2015, at 4:35 PM, Ted Dunning <> wrote:
> >>
> >> Jim,
> >>
> >> Is that really happening?  Is the fun leaving?  Or is it we are all
> >> just getting old and are forgetting the child-like wonder?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Jim Jagielski <>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Some of you may know that I've started a Vlog series on Youtube
> >>> around some topics I find interesting, mostly around open source.
> >>>
> >>> My latest is about the risks around open source today where the fun
> >>> and passion that used to exist around open source is drying up or
> >>> being discounted. Since Apache is one of the still remaining oasis of
> >>> open source being all about community and fun whilst still changing
> >>> the world, I'd like to ask for some thoughts from the membership
> >>> about their concerns, etc... that I can fold into the 2nd part of
> >>> this mini-series.
> >>>
> >>> If so, please contact me directly. I have set the Reply-To header
> >>> accordingly.
> >>>
> >>> Thx!
> >>>
> >

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message