Plaintext
Just what is
“Open Source”?
(and why should I care)
Jim Jagielski || @jimjag
Who is this guy?
Jim Jagielski
Longest still-active developer/contributor
Co-founder of the Apache Software Foundation
(ASF), Member, Director and President
Director: Outercurve and Open Source Initiative
(OSI)
Consulting Engineer with Red Hat
Council Member: MARSEC-XL
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
What is Open Source?
Open Source Licensing
OSI and/or Free Software Foundation (FSF)
Approved
Free Software
As in Free Speech, not Free Beer
Open Source Methodology (secondary)
Community/Governance types
Many consider this just as important as the license
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
What is Open Source?
Also called Free Software
But the word “Free” confuses some people
FOSS: Free and Open Source Software
FLOSS: Free/Libre Open Source Software
Pretty much, all mean the same thing
The name can cause “religious” or “philosophical”
debates, but in government and industry, Open
Source is the more widely used term.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
What is Open Source?
Basic tenets:
Access to the source code (the code is Open
and Free)
Ability to use the source code (run it and/or
leverage it)
Ability to modify the source code
Ability to distribute the (modified) source code
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
What is Open Source?
Basically, it’s a “new” way to develop, license and
distribute code
Actually, there was “open source” even before it
was called that
The key technologies behind the Internet and the
Web and the Cloud are all Open Source based
Brings Scientific Method to IT
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
The draw of Open Source
(hacker)
Having a real impact in the development and
direction of IT
Personal satisfaction: I wrote that!
Sense of membership in a community
Sense of accomplishment - very quick turnaround
times
Developers and engineers love to tinker - huge
opportunity to do so
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
The draw of Open Source
(Companies/Orgs)
Having a real impact in the development and
direction of IT
Sense of membership in a community (most of the time)
Save on expensive resources
Ability to focus on what differentiates yourself
Allows for nimbleness and agility
Increased revenue and market share
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
The draw of Open Source
(users)
Access to the source code
Avoid vendor lock-in (or worse!)
Much better software
Better security record (more eyes)
Much more nimble development - frequent releases
Direct user input
Open Standards
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Open Source FUD ^
No quality or quality control
Prevents or slows development
Have to “give it away for free”
No real innovation
^: Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
True Open Source
For software to be Open Source, it must be under
an OSI or FSF approved Open Source License
Open Source Definition: http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd
Free Software Definition: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
New Open Source licenses are very hard to get
approved
There are really 3 main types
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Licenses
Open Source Licenses
Give Me Credit
AL (Apache License), BSD, MIT
Give Me Fixes
LGPL (Lesser GPL), EPL (Eclipse Public
License), MPL (Mozilla Public License)
Give Me Everything
GPL (General Public License)
- Dave Johnson
http://rollerweblogger.org/page/roller?entry=gimme_credit_gimme_fixes_gimmem
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Give Me Credit
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Give Me Credit
A liberal open source software license
Business friendly
Requires attribution
No warranty
Easily reused by other projects &
organizations (universal donor)
Legally, not complex
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Give Me Credit
Community Impacts:
Limited control by a single entity
Little value in direct competition
Used in widest variety of community types
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Give Me Fixes
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Give Me Fixes
MPL / EPL / LGPL
Used mostly with platforms or libraries
Protects the licensed code, but allows
larger derivative works with different
licensing
Still very business friendly
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Give Me Fixes
Community Impacts:
Easier single entity control
Direct development/improvements of the
code benefits all
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Give Me Everything
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Give Me Everything
GPL (copyleft)
Derivative works also under GPL
Linked works could also be under GPL
Viral nature may likely limit adoption
GPL trumps all others or else incompatible
legally, most complex
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Give Me Everything
Community Impacts:
“Forces”/”enables” dual-license business
strategy for copyright holder
Encourages full free-software community
Direct development/improvements of any
uses of the code benefits all, but mostly the
orig. author(s)
Contributors guaranteed all code will be free
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
License Differences
Mainly involve the licensing of derivative works
Only really applies during (re)distribution of
work
Where the “freedom” should be mostly
focused: the user or the code itself
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
One True License
There is no such thing
Licensing is selected to address what you are
trying to do
In general, Open Standards do better with AL-
like license
If wide adoption is important to you: again AL.
To restrict non-shared enhancements: copyleft
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Governance/Community
Community
AKA: Governance
Defines how the community operates
How conflicts are resolved
Growth path of the community
code
members
Again, 3 main types
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Governance Models
Walled Garden
“All your base are belong to us.”
Benevolent Dictator
“Supreme executive power derives
from a mandate from the masses,
not some farcical aquatic ceremony.”
Meritocratic Community
“Out of Chaos comes Order.”
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Walled Garden
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Walled Garden
Generally Licensed under copyleft-ish license (GPL)
Involvement in code is closed
Commit/patches limited to company employees
Any accepted code has stringent assignments
(copyright)
Code benefits mainly the corporate key-holders.
“Crowd-sourcing”
Final say in direction: not the coders but the owners.
Example: Spring and Java (kinda)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
BDFL
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Benevolent Dictator:
Licensed under All Open Source licenses
Involvement in code is open and based on merit.
Easy to provide patches/code
Single Dictator or Dictator with Generals (depending on size
and complexity of the code)
Dictator (and Generals) non-aligned with corporate interests.
The community assigns power to Dictator who has final say if
needed
Example: Think Linus and Linux.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Meritocracy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Meritocracy
Generally Licensed under liberal license (AL)
Involvement in code is open and based on merit.
Easiest model to provide code (simple, but
complete, IP clearance: no assign copyright)
Clearly defined path based on merit
Collaboration and Community Consensus is critical
Example: Think Apache Software Foundation.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Community Building
Use Email Lists
Drive Consensus
+1
No Poisonous People
Success Stories - HTTPD
Apache HTTP Server (“Apache”)
Reference implementation of HTTP
Most popular web server in existence
Found in numerous commercial web servers
Oracle, IBM,...
Influenced countless more
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Success Stories - HTTPD
By having a “free” and open source reference
implementation, the drive to create a separate
proprietary version was reduced.
“Why spend time and money, when we can use
this”
This allowed HTTP (and the Web) to grow and
STAY usable (compare to the old browser wars)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Success Stories - Linux
Succeeded dramatically where UNIX and
BSD did not.
Rules the server and mobile market-space
Variations serve as core of other devices as
well (think marine!!)
Numerous companies/entities are built
around it and depend on it
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Success Stories -
MARSSA
True Open architecture in maritime industry
Ensures wide and deep interoperability
Revolutionary Open Source, Open
Standard implementation
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Concluding Thoughts
Open Source should have a viable business or
emotional reason - be realistic in expectations
Give some thought to licensing early
Make it easier for developers and users to
“join”
Give them a reason to
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Concluding Thoughts
Trust your developers AND your users
Communication is key
Open Source is NOT the Good Housekeeping
Seal Of Approval
But don’t believe in all the FUD either
Success is not measured in market share, but
in adoption
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Helpful links
The Apache Software Foundation
www.apache.org
Red Hat, Inc (my employer)
www.redhat.com
Open Source Foundations
www.opensource.org
www.outercurve.org
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
That’s It
Thank you!
Any questions? In Honor:
Joseph Jagielski, Jr.
@jimjag
jim@jaguNET.com / jimjag@gmail.com
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
BACKUP CHARTS
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Publish or Perish
In Open Source, frequent releases indicate
healthy activity
What is collaborative s/w development other
than peer review?
Think how restrictive research would be w/o
open communication
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.