Contributed by Organizations or Campuses; Articles, Papers, and Reports; and Applications Development
UK Universities Love Open Source
| Title: | UK Universities Love Open Source (ID: CSD4609) | | Author(s): | John F. Oates (Duke University) | | Origin: | Contributed by Organizations or Campuses (2006) | | Type: | Articles, Papers, and Reports | | Abstract: | According to a survey by Open Source Software Advisory Service (OSS Watch), open source software on campuses in the United Kingdom has moved out of the shadows and into legitimate contention with proprietary software solutions. Results of the survey indicated that although only one-quarter of institutions include open source in their IT policies, 77 percent at least consider open source during procurement. Randy Metcalfe of OSS Watch said, "It's not about explaining what open source is any more, but how to compare open source and proprietary software." The increase in use of Moodle, an open source learning management system, has been especially significant, according to Metcalfe. "To reach 56 percent in two and a half years is amazing," he said. In addition, Firefox, an open source browsers, is reportedly available on 68 percent of university computers (all have Internet Explorer). Of concern to some observers, however, is the fact that very few universities share changes they make to open source software. Many universities have policies dictating that developments are the property of the institution, preventing their being submitted to the open source community for broader use. | | View this resource: | |
The Social Structure of Free and Open Source Software Development
| Title: | The Social Structure of Free and Open Source Software Development (ID: CSD3757) | | Author(s): | Kevin Crowston (Syracuse University) and James Howison (Syracuse University) | | Source: | First Monday | | Origin: | Contributed by Organizations or Campuses (2005) | | Type: | Articles, Papers, and Reports | | Abstract: | Metaphors, such as the Cathedral and Bazaar, used to describe the organization of FLOSS projects typically place them in sharp contrast to proprietary development by emphasizing FLOSS's distinctive social and communications structures. But what do we really know about the communication patterns of FLOSS projects? How generalizable are the projects that have been studied? Is there consistency across FLOSS projects? Questioning the assumption of distinctiveness is important because practitioner–advocates from within the FLOSS community rely on features of social structure to describe and account for some of the advantages of FLOSS production. To address this question, we examined 120 project teams from SourceForge, representing a wide range of FLOSS project types, for their communications centralization as revealed in the interactions in the bug tracking system. We found that FLOSS development teams vary widely in their communications centralization, from projects completely centered on one developer to projects that are highly decentralized and exhibit a distributed pattern of conversation between developers and active users. We suggest, therefore, that it is wrong to assume that FLOSS projects are distinguished by a particular social structure merely because they are FLOSS. Our findings suggest that FLOSS projects might have to work hard to achieve the expected development advantages which have been assumed to flow from "going open." In addition, the variation in communications structure across projects means that communications centralization is useful for comparisons between FLOSS teams. We found that larger FLOSS teams tend to have more decentralized communication patterns, a finding that suggests interesting avenues for further research examining, for example, the relationship between communications structure and code modularity. | | View this resource: | |
Fundamental Issues With Open Source Software Development
| Title: | Fundamental Issues With Open Source Software Development (ID: CSD3208) | | Author(s): | Michelle Levesque (University of Toronto) | | Source: | First Monday | | Origin: | Contributed by Organizations or Campuses (2004) | | Type: | Articles, Papers, and Reports | | Abstract: | Despite the growing success of the Open Source movement, most of the general public continues to feel that Open Source software is inaccessible to them. This paper discusses five fundamental problems with the current Open Source software development trend, explores why these issues are holding the movement back, and offers solutions that might help overcome these problems. The lack of focus on user interface design causes users to prefer proprietary software's more intuitive interface. Open Source software tends to lack the complete and accessible documentation that retains users. Developers focus on features in their software, rather than ensuring that they have a solid core. Open Source programmers also tend to program with themselves as an intended audience, rather than the general public. Lastly, there is a widely known stubbornness by Open Source programmers in refusing to learn from what lessons proprietary software has to offer. If Open Source software wishes to become widely used and embraced by the general public, all five of these issues will have to be overcome. | | View this resource: | |
Democratizing Software: Open Source, the Hacker Ethic, and Beyond
| Title: | Democratizing Software: Open Source, the Hacker Ethic, and Beyond (ID: CSD2996) | | Origin: | Contributed by Organizations or Campuses (2003) | | Type: | Articles, Papers, and Reports | | Abstract: | The development of computer software and hardware in closed-source, corporate environments limits the extent to which technologies can be used to empower the marginalized and oppressed. Various forms of resistance and counter-mobilization may appear, but these reactive efforts are often constrained by limitations that are embedded in the technologies by those in power. In the world of open source software development, actors have one more degree of freedom in the proactive shaping and modification of technologies, both in terms of design and use. Drawing on the work of philosopher of technology Andrew Feenberg, I argue that the open source model can act as a forceful lever for positive change in the discipline of software development. A glance at the somewhat vacuous hacker ethos, however, demonstrates that the technical community generally lacks a cohesive set of positive values necessary for challenging dominant interests. Instead, Feenberg's commitment to "deep democratization" is offered as a guiding principle for incorporating more preferable values and goals into software development processes. | | View this resource: | |
|
