DOCSLIB.ORG

Community Source 1 Community Source

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Community Source 1 Community Source Community source 1 Community source Community Source is a term that has different meanings based on context and the community where it is used. Community Source as a Type of Open Source Community Colleges and universities have used the term Community Source to refer to a type of community coordination mechanism that builds on the practices of open source communities. The software of these collective efforts are distributed via an approved Open Source Initiative (OSI) license. Examples include the Sakai Project, Kuali Foundation, and Open Source Portfolio. Copyright for the software is often held by an independent foundation (organized as a 501c3 corporation in the United States) modeled on the contributor agreements, licensing, and distribution practices of the Apache Foundation. An important distinctive characteristic of community source as opposed to plain open source is that the community includes some organizations or institutions that are committing their resources to the community, in the form of human resources or other financial elements. In this way, the open source project will have both more solid support, rather than purely volunteer efforts as found in other open source communities, and will possibly be shaped by the strategic requirements of the institution committing the resource. Brad Wheeler has noted that Community Source can be understood as a hybrid model of a community like "The Pub between the Cathedral and the Bazaar” where higher education can really solve its [application] software challenges. References below provide more details regarding the use of community source as a practice in higher education. The Community Source Model in Higher Education (Excerpt from Wheeler, 2007 in References) The Community Source Model is a hybrid model that blends elements of directed development, in the classic sense of an organization employing staff and resources to work on a project, and the openness of traditional open-source projects like Apache. The resulting software is available under an Open Source Initiative (OSI) approved license. The code can be examined, changed, redistributed, sold, or incorporated into other products without fee. Anyone can make changes, and subject to quality review, those changes can be incorporated back into an open-source application for the benefit of all. The distinguishing feature of the Community Source Model is that many of the investments of developers' time, design, and project governance come from institutional contributions by colleges, universities, and some commercial firms rather than from individuals. These contributions may be tendered as the first phase of a project, and then additional work may be contributed on an ongoing, voluntary basis by those institutions with a continuing interest in the project. The project often establishes a software framework and baseline functionality, and then the community develops additional features as needed over time. Community Source Model projects generally operate as follows. Several institutions realize they are trying to solve a similar problem—need for a research administration system is a recent example. After some discussions and resulting agreement on project objectives, timelines, and philosophy, the institutions pool their resources under a project board of institutional leaders. The institutions are often agreeing to tender existing staff time to the direction of the project, and as such, this is not a new cash outlay but rather an aggregation of existing staff in a virtual organization. A grant from a foundation may provide cohesion among the investors. Typical recent projects have ranged from $1 to $8 million in funding and from twelve to thirty months in duration. Each investor signs a Corporate Contributor Agreement that grants a copyright license for the software to the project or foundation (modeled on the practice of the Apache Foundation). The project usually operates on a date-driven delivery schedule. This forces difficult decisions in the reality triangle of balancing features, resources, and time, but such a schedule is essential to the growth of community confidence. Community source 2 The project board then establishes the appropriate structure for articulating the system requirements, the technical choices, and a project manager. It is essential that clear roles and responsibilities be established early, and the project participants will benefit from spending some face-to-face time together at the beginning of the project. Experience reveals that some staff members may not work well in distributed, virtual organizations, whereas others find the work to be career-renewing. Early projects had to transition from an investor-based project to a community and a foundation. New projects can take advantage of the foundations' existing infrastructure and how-to knowledge and can begin as a project of a foundation. There is no rulebook for Community Source Model projects for every domain, but there is a growing body of accumulated wisdom on how to coordinate institutional investments and execute a development plan for quality software. Community source software licensing Another use of community source is when the source code to proprietary software is licensed to members of a defined community, each member of which must explicitly enter an agreement with the code owner in order to be permitted access to source code. By this definition, community source licenses are incompatible with both open source and free software, since in open source and free software anyone may have access to source code without entering into an agreement with anyone else, though they must accept the license. A community source license cannot meet the requirements of the Open Source Definition, whose first provision requires free redistribution of software. A community source license cannot meet the requirements of The Free Software Definition, since freedoms 1 (freedom to study) and 3 (freedom to modify and distribute modified versions to anyone) require open access to source code. A community source license may violate other provisions of the open source and free software definitions. One motivation for community source may be to promote the use of software production and development models similar to those used in open source communities. But because the community is not open, those production and development models must differ in subtle or marked ways from those used in open source. Another motivation may be to ease adoption by customers of complex software from a proprietary supplier, using trusted intermediaries to help. Examples of community source licenses • Sun Community Source License • RealNetworks Community Source License • Microsoft Community License References • Community-source development appeals in tough times [1], Darryl K. Taft (March 2, 2010), eWeek • The Inevitable Unbundling of Software and Support [2], Brad Wheeler (February 2004). Campus Technology • An Open Mind on Open Source, Karla Hignite (August 2004), Business Officer Magazine • Community Source Springs Forth, Anna Jackson (May 2005), Business Officer Magazine • A Flexible Financial System, Kathleen McNeely & Mary Wheeler (February, 2006), Business Officer Magazine • Open Source 2010: Reflections on 2007 [3], Brad Wheeler (January/February, 2007). EDUCAUSE Review • Invest Locally [4], Christopher Coppola (April 2007), Campus Technology • Mitigating the Risks of Big Systems [5], Brad Wheeler & Joanne DeStefano, (July 2007), Business Officer Magazine Community source 3 References [1] http:/ / www. eweek. com/ c/ a/ Application-Development/ CommunitySource-Development-Appeals-in-Tough-Times/ [2] http:/ / campustechnology. com/ articles/ 39703/ [3] http:/ / www. educause. edu/ apps/ er/ erm07/ erm0712. asp [4] http:/ / campustechnology. com/ articles/ 46385 [5] http:/ / www. nacubo. org/ Business_Officer_Magazine/ Magazine_Archives/ July-August_2007/ Mitigating_the_Risks_of_Big_Systems. html Article Sources and Contributors 4 Article Sources and Contributors Community source Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=378411098 Contributors: CommonsDelinker, Gronky, JCS2050, Kernel Saunters, Mherrick66, Nurg, Ohnoitsjamie, SCEhardt, Sakaiguy, Seanskye, Slaporte, Stuartyeates, Warmspell, 5 anonymous edits License Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported http:/ / creativecommons. org/ licenses/ by-sa/ 3. 0/.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lifecycle Management in Government-Driven Open Source Projects – Practical Framework
    ISSN (print):2182-7796, ISSN (online):2182-7788, ISSN (cd-rom):2182-780X Available online at www.sciencesphere.org/ijispm Lifecycle management in government-driven open source projects – practical framework Katja Henttonen VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Tietotie 3, 02150 Espoo Finland www.shortbio.org/[email protected] Jukka Kääriäinen VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Kaitoväylä 1, 90530 Oulu Finland www.shortbio.org/[email protected] Jani Kylmäaho National Land Survey of Finland (NLS) Opastinsilta 12C, 00521 Helsinki Finland www.shortbio.org/[email protected] Abstract: In many parts of the world, public sector organizations are increasingly interested in collaborating across organizational (and even national) boundaries to develop software solutions under an open licence. However, without sound lifecycle management practices, the full benefits of open collaboration are not achieved and projects fail to achieve sustained success. This paper introduces a lifecycle management model and framework for government-driven open-source projects and reports about its use in a real-life case study. Our focus is on lifecycle management activities which take place between deployment and end-of-life. The framework was developed iteratively through a series of focus group discussions with representatives of public sector organizations. After the framework had been taken into use in our real-life case project, individual qualitative interviews were conducted to collect experiences on its benefits and weaknesses. According to the initial evidence, the deployment of the framework seems to have brought concrete benefits to the project, e.g. by contributing positively to community growth, software quality and inter-organizational learning.
    [Show full text]
  • FOSS Philosophy 6 the FOSS Development Method 7
    1 Published by the United Nations Development Programme’s Asia-Pacific Development Information Programme (UNDP-APDIP) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia www.apdip.net Email: [email protected] © UNDP-APDIP 2004 The material in this book may be reproduced, republished and incorporated into further works provided acknowledgement is given to UNDP-APDIP. For full details on the license governing this publication, please see the relevant Annex. ISBN: 983-3094-00-7 Design, layout and cover illustrations by: Rezonanze www.rezonanze.com PREFACE 6 INTRODUCTION 6 What is Free/Open Source Software? 6 The FOSS philosophy 6 The FOSS development method 7 What is the history of FOSS? 8 A Brief History of Free/Open Source Software Movement 8 WHY FOSS? 10 Is FOSS free? 10 How large are the savings from FOSS? 10 Direct Cost Savings - An Example 11 What are the benefits of using FOSS? 12 Security 13 Reliability/Stability 14 Open standards and vendor independence 14 Reduced reliance on imports 15 Developing local software capacity 15 Piracy, IPR, and the WTO 16 Localization 16 What are the shortcomings of FOSS? 17 Lack of business applications 17 Interoperability with proprietary systems 17 Documentation and “polish” 18 FOSS SUCCESS STORIES 19 What are governments doing with FOSS? 19 Europe 19 Americas 20 Brazil 21 Asia Pacific 22 Other Regions 24 What are some successful FOSS projects? 25 BIND (DNS Server) 25 Apache (Web Server) 25 Sendmail (Email Server) 25 OpenSSH (Secure Network Administration Tool) 26 Open Office (Office Productivity Suite) 26 LINUX 27 What is Linux?
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Table of Contents Preface . ix 1. Open Source Licensing, Contract, and Copyright Law . 1 Basic Principles of Copyright Law 1 Contract and Copyright 3 Open Source Software Licensing 4 Issues with Copyrights and Patents 7 The Open Source Definition 8 Warranties 11 2. The MIT, BSD, Apache, and Academic Free Licenses . 14 The MIT (or X) License 14 The BSD License 15 The Apache License, v1.1 and v2.0 17 The Academic Free License 24 Application and Philosophy 30 3. The GPL, LGPL, and Mozilla Licenses . 34 GNU General Public License 35 GNU Lesser General Public License 49 The Mozilla Public License 1.1 (MPL 1.1) 62 Application and Philosophy 81 4. Qt, Artistic, and Creative Commons Licenses . 85 The Q Public License 85 Artistic License (Perl) 90 Creative Commons Licenses 98 vii 5. Non-Open Source Licenses . 114 Classic Proprietary License 114 Sun Community Source License 120 Microsoft Shared Source Initiative 144 6. Legal Impacts of Open Source and Free Software Licensing . 147 Entering Contracts 148 Statutory Developments Related to Software Contracts 150 The Self-Enforcing Nature of Open Source and Free Software Licenses 151 The Global Scope of Open Source and Free Software Licensing 153 The “Negative Effects” of Open Source and Free Software Licensing 154 Community Enforcement of Open Source and Free Software Licenses 158 Compatible and Incompatible Licensing: Multiple and Cross Licensing 159 7. Software Development Using Open Source and Free Software Licenses . 164 Models of Open Source and Free Software Development 164 Forking 171 Choosing an Open Source or Free Software License 174 Drafting Open Source Licenses 176 Appendix: Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs License .
    [Show full text]
  • Open Source: Open for Business Open Source: Open for Business for Open Source: Open LEF09/3Cover.Qxd 9/3/04 1:18 PM Page 2
    LEF09/3cover.qxd 9/3/04 1:18 PM Page 1 THE LEADING PRESENTS: FORUM EDGE THE LEADING EDGE FORUM PRESENTS: Open Source: Open for Business Open Source: Open for Business LEF09/3cover.qxd 9/3/04 1:18 PM Page 2 CSC’s Leading Edge Forum is a global thought leadership program that examines the technology trends and issues affecting us today and those that will impact us in the future. As part of the CSC Office of Innovation, the LEF explores emerging technologies through sponsored inno- vation and grants programs, applied research, awards for the most innovative client solutions, and alliances with research labs. The LEF examines technology marketplace ABOUT THE LEF DIRECTORS trends and best practices, and stimulates innovation and collaboration among CSC, our clients and our alliance partners. In this ongoing series of reports about technology directions, the LEF looks at the role of innovation in the marketplace both now and in the years to come. By studying technology’s current realities and anticipating its future shape, these reports provide organizations with the necessary balance between tactical decision making and strategic planning. PAUL GUSTAFSON WILLIAM KOFF Director, Leading Edge Forum, and Senior Partner, Vice President, Leading Edge Forum CSC Consulting Group Paul Gustafson is an accomplished technologist and Bill Koff is a leader in CSC’s technology community. proven leader in emerging technologies, applied He chairs the Leading Edge Forum executive committee, research and strategy. As director of the Leading Edge whose members are the chief technologists from each Forum, Paul brings vision and leadership to a portfolio of CSC’s business units.
    [Show full text]
  • Dod and Open Source Software TECH VIEWS
    How long can you wait for CMMI® Compliance? Manage your projects in guaranteed compliance with the CMMI — Now! Don't waste valuable time and resources developing CMMI-compliant processes from scratch when there is a proven approach that guarantees success. With processMax®, you begin operating in compliance immediately: no process development is required! processMax is a complete project management system, integrated with Microsoft Project, and is guaranteed by pragma SYSTEMS to be compliant with CMMI-DEV. With processMax, managers and their teams efficiently collaborate with step-by-step procedures, integrated document management, risk management, automated workflow, and automated meas- urement and reporting. processMax increases productivity, reduces defects, and manages risk. Now available as a hosted service for both our subscription and perpetual licenses, processMax is more affordable than ever. We manage the server, installation, updates, and upgrades. More than 70 organizations have passed Level 2 and Level 3 appraisals with processMax, at a frac- tion of the time and expense required by traditional methods. pragma SYSTEMS CORPORATION Please contact us to learn how processMax, can help you achieve your www.pragmasystems.com 703-796-0010 compliance goals. [email protected] GSA Schedule Contract NO. GS-35F-0559S. processMax is a registered trademark of pragma SYSTEMS CORPORATION. Although processMax makes use of portions of “CMMI for Development, Version 1.2,” CMU/SEI-2006-TR-008, copyright 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University, neither the Software Engineering Institute nor Carnegie Mellon University have reviewed or endorsed this product. Copyright 2010 SYSTEMS CORPORATION This is a paid advertisement. pragma 2 STN 14-1 February 2011: DoD and Open Source Software TECH VIEWS By John Dingman, Editor t has been three and a half years since Software Tech But simply downloading a publicly available component and News addressed the topic of Open Source Software including it in a project can lead to significant repercussions.
    [Show full text]
  • Sakai: Building an Open Source Community
    Sakai: Building an Open Source Community A Retrospective Diary Version 0.8 Charles Severance Copyright ©2011- All Rights Reserved, Charles Severance. ISBN-13: 978-1494273675 ISBN-10: 1494273675 CreateSpace Title: 4541576 Front Cover Photography: Town Square Photo, Mason MI Back Cover Photography: HJ Seeley Sakaiger Art: www.sakaiger.com Draft 0.0.1 Printing: January 2011, Michigan Library Espresso Book Machine Draft 0.0.2 Printing: March 2011, Michigan Library Espresso Book Machine First Printing (Alpha 0.7.1) : May 2011, Amazon CreateSpace Second Printing (Alpha 0.7.2) : January 2012, Amazon CreateSpace Third Printing : January 2014, Amazon CreateSpace Preface Writing software that supports teaching, learning and collaboration is far more than just a job. Since teaching and learning are some of the most fundamental human activities, we all have a vested interest in teaching and learning software. Discussions about the design of teaching and learning software can evoke passions from virtually everyone involved in the pro- cess. Passions run high and the stakes are high. On most college cam- puses, the software to support teaching and learning (Blackboard, Moodle, Sakai, etc.) is used more often than any other campus software. Student and teacher lives revolve around the software. A significant outage of a course management system in the last few weeks of class is likely to produce howls of anger from students, teachers, and administrators alike. Building an open source product and community around the Sakai Learning Management System was far from a mere technical activity. This book is about that journey of making open source software and deriving and chang- ing the rules as to how we would make that software as we went along.
    [Show full text]
  • Software Development Using Open Source and Free Software Licenses
    CHAPTER 7 Chapter 7 Software Development Using Open Source and Free Software Licenses The purpose of open source and free software licensing is to permit and encourage the involvement by licensees in improvement, modification, and distribution of the licensed work. This open development model of software development is the unique strength of the open source and free software movement. While the open source and free software licenses already discussed approach open software development differ- ently, open development is the goal. This chapter describes the basic principles of software development under open source and free software licenses, including the problems of forking, community develop- ment under the bazaar and the cathedral models, how open source and free software projects are initiated and maintained, and the effect that license choices can have on software development. This chapter also briefly discusses the basic principles of draft- ing contracts, for those who are interested in drafting their own software license. Models of Open Source and Free Software Development The open source and free software licensing is driven by the development model, or models, that it is intended to encourage. After all, there is little point to permitting the “free” modification and distribution of a work if people do not actually take the opportunity to modify and distribute the licensed work. These licenses are intended to permit, and indeed, to encourage the contributions of others to the project. Nonetheless, one of the first open development projects relied, at least at the beginning, on a relatively small number of closely-knit developers. This project was Richard Stallman’s plan to develop a complete operating system mod- eled after the Unix operating system but written entirely in free code.* * The following discussion draws heavily from the essay of Eric Raymond, “The Cathedral and the Bazaar,” in The Cathedral & The Bazaar: Musing on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary, Eric S.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Source Software: a Survey from 10,000 Feet
    Foundations and Trends® in sample Vol. xx, No xx (xxxx) 1–147 © xxxx xxxxxxxxx DOI: xxxxxx Open Source Software: A Survey from 10,000 Feet Stephanos Androutsellis-Theotokis1, Diomidis Spinellis2, Maria Kechagia3 and Georgios Gousios4 1 Patision 76, Athens, GR-104 34, Greece, [email protected] 2 Patision 76, Athens, GR-104 34, Greece, [email protected] 3 Patision 76, Athens, GR-104 34, Greece, [email protected] 4 Patision 76, Athens, GR-104 34, Greece, [email protected] Abstract Open source software (OSS), the origins of which can be traced back to the 1950s, is software distributed with a license that allows access to its source code, free redistribution, the creation of derived works, and unre- stricted use. OSS applications cover most areas of consumer and business soft- ware and their study touches many disciplines, including computer science, information systems, economics, psychology, and law. Behind a successful OSS project lies a community of actors, ranging from core developers to pas- sive users, held together by a flexible governance structure and membership, leadership and contribution policies that align their interests. The motivation behind individuals participating in OSS projects can be, among others, social, ideological, hedonistic, or signaling, while companies gain from their access to high-quality, innovative projects and an increase in their reputation and vis- ibility. Nowadays many business models rely on OSS as a product through the provision of associated services, or in coexistence with proprietary software, hardware, services, or licensing. The numerous OSS licenses mainly differ on how they treat derived software: some contain provisions that maintain its availability in open source form while others allow more flexibility.
    [Show full text]
  • OSS V. Perens
    Case: 18-15189, 08/15/2018, ID: 10978548, DktEntry: 19, Page 1 of 86 Case No. 18-15189 ___________________________________________ IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT _____________________________________ OPEN SOURCE SECURITY, INC. AND BRADLEY SPENGLER, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BRUCE PERENS, Defendant-Appellee. _____________________________________ ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, NO. 3:17-CV-04002-LB THE HONORABLE LAUREL BEELER, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, PRESIDING _____________________________________ APPELLEE’S SUPPLEMENTAL EXCERPTS OF RECORD _____________________________________ Jamie Williams Melody Drummond Hansen Aaron Mackey Heather J. Meeker ELECTRONIC FRONTIER O’MELVENY & MEYERS LLP FOUNDATION 2765 Sand Hill Road 815 Eddy Street Menlo Park, California 94025-7019 San Francisco, California 94109 (650) 473-2600 (415) 436-9333 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Cara L. Gagliano O’MELVENY & MEYERS LLP th Two Embarcadero Center, 28 Floor San Francisco, California 94111-3823 (415) 984-8899 [email protected] Counsel for Defendant-Appellee Case: 18-15189, 08/15/2018, ID: 10978548, DktEntry: 19, Page 2 of 86 APPELLEES’ SUPPLEMENTAL EXCERPTS OF RECORD INDEX ECF Date Document Description Page No. 31 10/31/17 Request For Judicial Notice In Support of SER 1 – Defendant Bruce Perens’s Notice of Motion and SER 3 Special Motion to Strike the First Amended Complaint Pursuant to the California Anti-SLAPP Statute, Code of Civil
    [Show full text]