DOCSLIB.ORG

Why Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS, FLOSS, Or FOSS)? Look at the Numbers!

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Why Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS, FLOSS, Or FOSS)? Look at the Numbers! Translations available: Czech | French | Japanese | Spanish Why Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS, FLOSS, or FOSS)? Look at the Numbers! David A. Wheeler http://www.dwheeler.com/contactme.html Revised as of July 18, 2015 This paper (and its supporting database) provides quantitative data that, in many cases, using open source software / free software (abbreviated as OSS/FS, FLOSS, or FOSS) is a reasonable or even superior approach to using their proprietary competition according to various measures. This paper’s goal is to show that you should consider using OSS/FS when acquiring software. This paper examines popularity, reliability, performance, scalability, security, and total cost of ownership. It also has sections on non-quantitative issues, unnecessary fears, OSS/FS on the desktop, usage reports, governments and OSS/FS, other sites providing related information, and ends with some conclusions. An appendix gives more background information about OSS/FS. You can view this paper at http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html (HTML format). A short presentation (briefing) based on this paper is also available. Palm PDA users may wish to use Plucker to view this longer report. Old archived copies and a list of changes are also available. 1. Introduction Open Source Software / Free Software (aka OSS/FS), also described as Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS), has risen to great prominence. Briefly, FLOSS programs are programs whose licenses give users the freedom to run the program for any purpose, to study and modify the program, and to redistribute copies of either the original or modified program (without having to pay royalties to previous developers). The goal of this paper is to convince you to consider using FLOSS when you’re looking for software, using quantitive measures. Some sites provide a few anecdotes on why you should use FLOSS, but for many that’s not enough information to justify using FLOSS. Instead, this paper emphasizes quantitative measures (such as experiments and market studies) to justify why using FLOSS products is in many circumstances a reasonable or even superior approach. I should note that while I find much to like about FLOSS, I’m not a rabid advocate; I use both proprietary and FLOSS products myself. Vendors of proprietary products often work hard to find numbers to support their claims; this page provides a useful antidote of hard figures to aid in comparing proprietary products to FLOSS. Others have come to the same conclusions, for example, Forrester Research concluded in September 2006 that “Firms should consider open source options for mission-critical applications”. I believe that this paper has met its goal; others seem to think so too. The 2004 report of the California Performance Review, a report from the state of California, urges that “the state should more extensively consider use of open source software”, and specifically references this paper. A review at the Canadian Open Source Education and Research (CanOpenER) site stated “This is an excellent look at the some of the reasons why any [organization] should consider the use of [FLOSS]... [it] does a wonderful job of bringing the facts and figures of real usage comparisons and how the figures are arrived at. No FUD or paid for industry reports here, just the facts”. This paper been referenced by many other works, too. It’s my hope that you’ll find it useful as well. The following subsections describe the paper’s scope, challenges in creating it, the paper’s terminology, and the bigger picture. This is followed by a description of the rest of the paper’s organization (listing the sections such as popularity, reliability, performance, scalability, security, and total cost of ownership). Those who find this paper interesting may also be interested in the other documents available on David A. Wheeler’s personal home page. A short presentation (briefing) based on this paper is also available. This paper has become long, there is now a supporting database of OSS/FS (FLOSS) quantitative studies that you may find easier to use. You may also be interested in the discussion group for quantitative numbers about free / libre / open source software. 1.1 Scope As noted above, the goal of this paper is to convince you to consider using FLOSS when you’re looking for software, using quantitive measures. Note that this paper’s goal is not to show that all FLOSS is better than all proprietary software. Certainly, there are many who believe this is true from ethical, moral, or social grounds. It’s true that FLOSS users have fundamental control and flexibility advantages, since they can modify and maintain their own software to their liking. And some countries perceive advantages to not being dependent on a sole-source company based in another country. However, no numbers could prove the broad claim that FLOSS is always “better” (indeed you cannot reasonably use the term “better” until you determine what you mean by it). Instead, I’ll simply compare commonly-used FLOSS software with commonly-used proprietary software, to show that at least in certain situations and by certain measures, some FLOSS software is at least as good or better than its proprietary competition. Of course, some FLOSS software is technically poor, just as some proprietary software is technically poor. And remember -- even very good software may not fit your specific needs. But although most people understand the need to compare proprietary products before using them, many people fail to even consider FLOSS products, or they create policies that unnecessarily inhibit their use; those are errors this paper tries to correct. This paper doesn’t describe how to evaluate particular FLOSS programs; a companion paper describes how to evaluate FLOSS programs. This paper also doesn’t explain how an organization would transition to an FLOSS approach if one is selected. Other documents cover transition issues, such as The Interchange of Data between Administrations (IDA) Open Source Migration Guidelines (November 2003) and the German KBSt’s Open Source Migration Guide (July 2003) (though both are somewhat dated). Organizations can transition to FLOSS in part or in stages, which for many is a more practical transition approach. I’ll emphasize the operating system (OS) known as GNU/Linux (which many abbreviate as “Linux”), the Apache web server, the Mozilla Firefox web browser, and the OpenOffice.org office suite, since these are some of the most visible FLOSS projects. I’ll also primarily compare FLOSS software to Microsoft’s products (such as Windows and IIS), since Microsoft Windows is widely used and Microsoft is one of proprietary software’s strongest proponents. Note, however, that even Microsoft makes and uses FLOSS themselves (they have even sold software using the GNU GPL license, as discussed below). I’ll mention Unix systems as well, though the situation with Unix is more complex; today’s Unix systems include many FLOSS components or software primarily derived from FLOSS components. Thus, comparing proprietary Unix systems to FLOSS systems (when examined as whole systems) is often not as clear-cut. This paper uses the term “Unix-like” to mean systems intentionally similar to Unix; both Unix and GNU/Linux are “Unix-like” systems. The most recent Apple Macintosh OS (MacOS OS X) presents the same kind of complications; older versions of MacOS were wholly proprietary, but Apple’s OS has been redesigned so that it’s now based on a Unix system with substantial contributions from FLOSS programs. Indeed, Apple is now openly encouraging collaboration with FLOSS developers. 1.2 Challenges It’s a challenge to write any paper like this; measuring anything is always difficult, for example. Most of these figures are from other works, and it was difficult to find many of them. But there are some special challenges that you should be aware of: legal problems in publishing data, the reluctance of many FLOSS users to publicly admit it (for fear of retribution), and dubious studies (typically those funded by a product vendor). Many proprietary software product licenses include clauses that forbid public criticism of the product without the vendor’s permission. Obviously, there’s no reason that such permission would be granted if a review is negative -- such vendors can ensure that any negative comments are reduced and that harsh critiques, regardless of their truth, are never published. This significantly reduces the amount of information available for unbiased comparisons. Reviewers may choose to change their report so it can be published (omitting important negative information), or not report at all -- in fact, they might not even start the evaluation. Some laws, such as UCITA (a law in Maryland and Virginia), specifically enforce these clauses forbidding free speech, and in many other locations the law is unclear -- making researchers bear substantial legal risk that these clauses might be enforced. These legal risks have a chilling effect on researchers, and thus makes it much harder for customers to receive complete unbiased information. This is not merely a theoretical problem; these license clauses have already prevented some public critique, e.g., Cambridge researchers reported that they were forbidden to publish some of their benchmarked results of VMWare ESX Server and Connectix/Microsoft Virtual PC. Oracle has had such clauses for years. Hopefully these unwarranted restraints of free speech will be removed in the future. But in spite of these legal tactics to prevent disclosure of unbiased data, there is still some publicly available data, as this paper shows. Another problem is that many users of FLOSS are reluctant to admit it. ZDNet UK’s November 25, 2005 article “Why open source projects are not publicised” by Ingrid Marson examines this. For example, it notes that many are afraid of retribution.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Intellectual Property Law Week Helpful Diversity Or Hopeless Confusion?
    Intellectual Property Law Week Open Source License Proliferation: Helpful Diversity or Hopeless Confusion? Featuring Professor Robert Gomulkiewicz University of Washington School of Law Thursday, March 18, 2010 12:30-2:00 PM Moot Courtroom Abstract: One prominent issue among free and open source software (FOSS) developers (but little noticed by legal scholars) has been "license proliferation." "Proliferation" refers to the scores of FOSS licenses that are now in use with more being created all the time. The Open Source Initiative ("OSI") has certified over seventy licenses as conforming to the Open Source Definition, a key measure of whether a license embodies FOSS principles. Many believe that license proliferation encumbers and retards the success of FOSS. Why does proliferation occur? What are the pros and cons of multiple licenses? Does the growing number of FOSS licenses represent hopeless confusion (as many assume) or (instead) helpful diversity? To provide context and color, these issues are examined using the story of his creation of the Simple Public License (SimPL) and submission of the SimPL to the OSI for certification. Professor Robert Gomulkiewicz joined the UW law school faculty in 2002 to direct the graduate program in Intellectual Property Law and Policy. Prior to joining the faculty, he was Associate General Counsel at Microsoft where he led the group of lawyers providing legal counsel for development of Microsoft's major systems software, desktop applications, and developer tools software (including Windows and Office). Before joining Microsoft, Professor Gomulkiewicz practiced law at Preston, Gates & Ellis where he worked on the Apple v. Microsoft case. Professor Gomulkiewicz has published books and law review articles on open source software, mass market licensing, the UCITA, and legal protection for software.
    [Show full text]
  • Cisco Telepresence TC Software Licensing Information (TC4.1)
    Cisco TelePresence TC Software License information guide TC Software FEBRUARY 2011 Legal information and third party copyright and licenses For Cisco TelePresence products using TC software D14767.02 License Information for products using TC Software, TC4 February 2011. 1 © 2010-2011 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. www.cisco.com Cisco TelePresence TC Software License information guide ipcalc-1.3, ipcalc-license ...................................................................................... 16 TA - ToC - Hidden Table of Contents iproute-2.6.26, GPLv2 .......................................................................................16 What’stext anchor in iptables-1.4.28, GPLv2......................................................................................16 About this guide ..............................................................................................................4 iputils-s20071127, iputils-bsd-license .................................................... 16 The products covered by this guide: .....................................................4 jpeg lib, jpeg-license ................................................................................................ 17 this guide? User documentation .............................................................................................4 Kmod-*, GPLv2 ........................................................................................................19 Software download ................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • The Cathedral and the Bazaar Eric Steven Raymond Thyrsus Enterprises [
    The Cathedral and the Bazaar Eric Steven Raymond Thyrsus Enterprises [http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/] <[email protected]> This is version 3.0 Copyright © 2000 Eric S. Raymond Copyright Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Open Publication License, version 2.0. $Date: 2002/08/02 09:02:14 $ Revision History Revision1.57 11September2000 esr New major section “How Many Eyeballs Tame Complexity”. Revision1.52 28August2000 esr MATLAB is a reinforcing parallel to Emacs. Corbatoó & Vyssotsky got it in 1965. Revision1.51 24August2000 esr First DocBook version. Minor updates to Fall 2000 on the time-sensitive material. Revision1.49 5May2000 esr Added the HBS note on deadlines and scheduling. Revision1.51 31August1999 esr This the version that O’Reilly printed in the first edition of the book. Revision1.45 8August1999 esr Added the endnotes on the Snafu Principle, (pre)historical examples of bazaar development, and originality in the bazaar. Revision 1.44 29 July 1999 esr Added the “On Management and the Maginot Line” section, some insights about the usefulness of bazaars for exploring design space, and substantially improved the Epilog. Revision1.40 20Nov1998 esr Added a correction of Brooks based on the Halloween Documents. Revision 1.39 28 July 1998 esr I removed Paul Eggert’s ’graph on GPL vs. bazaar in response to cogent aguments from RMS on Revision1.31 February101998 esr Added “Epilog: Netscape Embraces the Bazaar!” Revision1.29 February91998 esr Changed “free software” to “open source”. Revision1.27 18November1997 esr Added the Perl Conference anecdote. Revision 1.20 7 July 1997 esr Added the bibliography.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Microsoft Virtualization Solutions Ebook
    MICROSOFT LICENSE TERMS MICROSOFT EBOOK These license terms are an agreement between Microsoft Corporation (or based on where you live, one of its affiliates) and you. Please read them. They apply to the licensed content named above, which includes the media on which you received it, if any. By using the licensed content, you accept these terms. If you do not accept them, do not use the licensed content. If you comply with these license terms, you have the rights below. 1. OVERVIEW. Licensed Content. The licensed content includes the eBook and associated media. License Model. The licensed content is licensed on a per user per device basis. 2. INSTALLATION AND USE RIGHTS. a. General. One user may install and use one copy of the licensed content on a single computer. b. Portable Device. You may install an additional copy of the licensed content on a portable device for the exclusive use of the primary user of the first copy of the licensed content. 3. SCOPE OF LICENSE. The licensed content is licensed, not sold. This agreement only gives you some rights to use the licensed content. Microsoft reserves all other rights. Unless applicable law gives you more rights despite this limitation, you may use the licensed content only as expressly permitted in this agreement. You agree Not to make copies of the licensed content; Not to distribute, rent, lease, lend, reproduce, transit, adapt, modify, link to, post, forward, make derivative works based upon, disseminate, publish or sublicense the licensed content or combine the licensed content with
    [Show full text]
  • Application Lifecycle Management Tools Open Source
    Application Lifecycle Management Tools Open Source Posh and tropistic Christofer congees almost despondingly, though Sam humiliating his breastworks recoins. Jorge usually assassinates astringently or disrupt crustily when interterritorial Marko voids streakily and convivially. Irresponsible Vijay unround broadly. With the software changes into three core business reason for anyone using powerful lifecycle tools across public activity management The package includes OSS project management tool Redmine and version. This year open source ALM tuleap httpwwwenaleancomentuleap is altogether good start. ALM tools automate the software development and deployment processes help. Micro Focus Application Lifecycle Management ALM software and solutions. Virtual flavor of the product with its embedded and application software before. Greg Lindhorst Principal Program Manager Thursday January 14 2021. The more List and Open-source Tools View ahead complete list ANT Anypoint Platform. Application Lifecycle Management Tools ALM is the continuous process of. Top 10 Application Lifecycle Management Tools For end Year. A degree to two the limitations of save open-source circuit otherwise inadequate tool. Best Free Application Lifecycle Management Software 2021. Each document type main source code is managed with SubversionSVN with. It is free of tools are the advent of the use after year after going through it connects people meet business outcomes as and open application source tools? Application Lifecycle Management SoftLanding. Top Application Lifecycle Management ALM Toolsets InfoQ. They also have original single proponent of truth providing any relevant. Then view the software projects, open application lifecycle management tools on open source option, and hybrid it can create and. Software lifecycle management SLM is the discipline for managing.
    [Show full text]
  • RT-ROS: a Real-Time ROS Architecture on Multi-Core Processors
    Future Generation Computer Systems 56 (2016) 171–178 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Future Generation Computer Systems journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fgcs RT-ROS: A real-time ROS architecture on multi-core processors Hongxing Wei a,1, Zhenzhou Shao b, Zhen Huang a, Renhai Chen d, Yong Guan b, Jindong Tan c,1, Zili Shao d,∗,1 a School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Beihang University, Beijing, 100191, PR China b College of Information Engineering, Capital Normal University, Beijing, 100048, PR China c Department of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Biomedical Engineering, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, 37996-2110, USA d Department of Computing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China article info a b s t r a c t Article history: ROS, an open-source robot operating system, is widely used and rapidly developed in the robotics Received 6 February 2015 community. However, running on Linux, ROS does not provide real-time guarantees, while real-time tasks Received in revised form are required in many robot applications such as robot motion control. This paper for the first time presents 20 April 2015 a real-time ROS architecture called RT-RTOS on multi-core processors. RT-ROS provides an integrated Accepted 12 May 2015 real-time/non-real-time task execution environment so real-time and non-real-time ROS nodes can be Available online 9 June 2015 separately run on a real-time OS and Linux, respectively, with different processor cores. In such a way, real-time tasks can be supported by real-time ROS nodes on a real-time OS, while non-real-time ROS nodes Keywords: Real-time operating systems on Linux can provide other functions of ROS.
    [Show full text]
  • Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software.Pdf
    Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software edited by Joseph Feller, Brian Fitzgerald, Scott A. Hissam, and Karim R. Lakhani The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England © 2005 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. MIT Press books may be purchased at special quantity discounts for business or sales promotional use. For information, please e-mail [email protected] or write to Special Sales Department, The MIT Press, 5 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142. This book was set in Stone sans and Stone serif by SNP Best-set Typesetter Ltd., Hong Kong. Printed and bound in the United States of America. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Perspectives on free and open source software / edited by Joseph Feller . [et al.]. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-262-06246-1 (alk. paper) 1. Shareware (Computer software) 2. Open source software. 3. Computer software—Development. I. Feller, Joseph, 1972– QA76.76.S46P47 2005 005.36—dc22 2004064954 10987654321 My love, thanks and humble apologies go to my very patient and supportive family: Carol, Caelen, Damien, and Dylan. JF Arís as Gaeilge: Buíochas mór le mo chlann, Máire, Pól agus Eimear. Is mór agam an iarracht a rinne sibh ar mo shon. BF With heartfelt warmth, I dedicate this book to my wife, Jacqueline, and my two sons, Derek and Zachery, who bring meaning to everything I do.
    [Show full text]
  • Locating and Extracting Digital Evidence from Hosted Virtual Desktop Infrastructures: Cloud Context
    Locating and Extracting Digital Evidence from Hosted virtual desktop Infrastructures: Cloud Context NIRBHAY JAWALE B.C.I.S (AUT University) New Zealand A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty of Design and Creative Technologies AUT University in partial fulfilment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Forensic Information Technology School of Computing and Mathematical Sciences Auckland, New Zealand 2010 II Declaration I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person nor material which to a substantial extent has been accepted for the qualification of any other degree or diploma of a University or other institution of higher learning, except where due acknowledgement is made in the acknowledgements. ........................... Signature III Acknowledgements This thesis was conducted at the Faculty of Design and Creative Technologies in the school of Computing and Mathematical Sciences at AUT University, New Zealand. During the course of writing this thesis, I have received a valuable support from many people. Firstly, I would like to thank my family for their blessings, encouragement and believing that I could get through this study. Secondly, I am deeply thankful and honored by having Professor Ajit Narayanan as my thesis supervisor. This thesis would not have been possible without his guidance, encouragement and interest; he took to supervise my thesis topic. I very much enjoyed the critical discussions and comments on my research topic with Professor Ajit Narayanan, this thesis would not have been in the present form without his valuable contribution.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fourth Paradigm
    ABOUT THE FOURTH PARADIGM This book presents the first broad look at the rapidly emerging field of data- THE FOUR intensive science, with the goal of influencing the worldwide scientific and com- puting research communities and inspiring the next generation of scientists. Increasingly, scientific breakthroughs will be powered by advanced computing capabilities that help researchers manipulate and explore massive datasets. The speed at which any given scientific discipline advances will depend on how well its researchers collaborate with one another, and with technologists, in areas of eScience such as databases, workflow management, visualization, and cloud- computing technologies. This collection of essays expands on the vision of pio- T neering computer scientist Jim Gray for a new, fourth paradigm of discovery based H PARADIGM on data-intensive science and offers insights into how it can be fully realized. “The impact of Jim Gray’s thinking is continuing to get people to think in a new way about how data and software are redefining what it means to do science.” —Bill GaTES “I often tell people working in eScience that they aren’t in this field because they are visionaries or super-intelligent—it’s because they care about science The and they are alive now. It is about technology changing the world, and science taking advantage of it, to do more and do better.” —RhyS FRANCIS, AUSTRALIAN eRESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE COUNCIL F OURTH “One of the greatest challenges for 21st-century science is how we respond to this new era of data-intensive
    [Show full text]
  • Cloud Accelerates Linux Adoption IDC ANALYZE the FUTURE
    IDC White Paper | Cloud Accelerates Linux Adoption IDC ANALYZE THE FUTURE Sponsored by: Cloud Accelerates Linux Adoption Oracle Corp. IDC OPINION Authors: Ashish Nadkarni Cloud has become a crucial foundation for digital transformation (DX) initiatives and Gary Chen is shaping the IT strategy of enterprises today. Companies are extending their IT February 2018 infrastructure into the cloud for running business-critical applications, developing new applications, and delivering new cloud-based services. Applications are the lifeblood of modern enterprises. They are the foundation on which businesses maintain their existing revenue streams while examining ways to create new ones. A sound application strategy is a must for frms to be successful in expanding their competitive differentiation in the digital economy. Operating systems (OSs) provide a common foundational layer that enables IT to run current and new generations of applications in traditional IT environments, on its own private cloud, and in public clouds and utilize a variety of computing options such as bare metal, virtualization, and containerization. The increased reliance of IT on the cloud has accelerated the adoption of open source operating systems, Linux being the chief among them. Over the past decade, Linux has evolved to be a versatile platform for current- and new-generation applications — a platform that can run in the cloud or on-premises and can include open source tools and frameworks used in modern application development. Enterprise platform functionality and
    [Show full text]
  • Introductory Lecture & FLOSS
    Introductory Lecture & FLOSS Lecture 1 TU Wien, 193.067 Free and Open Technologies (WS 2019/2020) Christoph Derndorfer and Lukas F. Lang This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Introduction Organization ● Lectures: ○ Weekly lecture to cover course materials (until Christmas) ○ Lectures take place on Tuesdays, 17:00–19:00, Argentinierstraße 8, Seminarraum/Bibliothek 194-05 ○ Attendance is mandatory ● Group project: ○ In groups of 4 students ○ 3 meetings with lecturers during the semester (week 44/2019, week 48/2019, week 2/2020) ○ Final presentations at the end of January (week 4/2020) ● Final paper: ○ In groups of 2 students ○ Final presentations at the end of January (week 5/2020) ○ Deadline: Sunday, February 9, 2020, 23:59 CET (no exceptions!) Organization ● Grading: ○ 50% group project ○ 35% seminar paper ○ 15% participation during lectures ○ All course components need to be passed in order to pass the overall course! ● Course materials: ○ Will be provided at https://free-and-open-technologies.github.io ● For further questions: ○ Email [email protected] and [email protected] Lecture outline 1. FLOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software) 2. Open Hardware 3. Open Data 4. Open Content/Open Educational Resources 5. Open Science/Research 6. Open Access 7. Open Spaces/Open Practices: Metalab Vienna 8. Guest Lecture: Stefanie Wuschitz (Mz* Baltazar’s Lab) Group project ● Goal: ○ Extend, contribute to, or create a new open project within scope of lecture topics ● Choose topic from a list (see course website) or (even better) suggest your own: ○ Groups of 4 students ○ Send a 1-page proposal until Friday, October 25, via email to both lecturers ■ Define the idea, goal, (potential) impact, requirements, and estimated effort ■ State deliverables (should be broken down into three milestones to discuss in meetings) ● Requirements: ○ Open and accessible (Git repository, openly licensed) → others can access/use/study/extend ○ Use time sheet to track and compare estimated vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Be a KDE Project? Martin Klapetek David Edmundson
    Why be a KDE Project? Martin Klapetek David Edmundson What is KDE? KDE is not a desktop, it's a community „Community of technologists, designers, writers and advocates who work to ensure freedom for all people through our software“ --The KDE Manifesto What is a KDE Project? Project needs more than just good code What will you get as a KDE Project? Git repository Git repository plus „scratch repos“ (your personal playground) Creating a scratch repo git push –all kde:scratch/username/reponame Git repository plus web interface (using GitPHP) Git repository plus migration from Gitorious.org Bugzilla (the slightly prettier version) Review Board Integration of git with Bugzilla and Review Board Integration of git with Bugzilla and Review Board Using server-side commit hooks ● BUG: 24578 ● CCBUG: 29456 ● REVIEW: 100345 ● CCMAIL: [email protected] Communication tools Mailing lists Wiki pages Forums Single sign-on to all services Official IRC channels #kde-xxxxx (on Freenode) IRC cloak me@kde/developer/mklapetek [email protected] email address Support from sysadmin team Community support Development support Translations (71 translation teams) Testing support (Active Jenkins and EBN servers, plus Quality Team) Project continuation (when you stop developing it) KDE e.V. support Financial and organizational help Trademark security Project's licence defense via FLA Promo support Stories in official KDE News site (Got the Dot?) Your blog aggregated at Planet KDE Promo through social channels Web hosting under kde.org domain Association with one of the best
    [Show full text]