DOCSLIB.ORG

PDF (611K, 38 Pages)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PDF (611K, 38 Pages) Getting Unstuck A Sampler of Advice for Open Source Projects by Sumana Harihareswara © 2020 Sumana Harihareswara under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 license (CC BY-SA) Please feel free to share this book, translate it, and reuse it per the license.1 Sumana Harihareswara Changeset Consulting LLC P.O. Box 721160 Jackson Heights, NY 11372 https://changeset.nyc/ +1 (929) 255-4578 Written in emacs and in New York City, 2020. Cover design and layout by Julia Rios Cover photograph by Susanne Stöckli For Leonard, my foundation. And for Aaron Swartz, our lighthouse. Table of Contents • Introduction • Conducting a SWOT analysis • How to start thinking about budgets and money • Teaching and including unskilled volunteers • An outline of the full book • Acknowledgments • About the author • Feedback welcome Introduction Getting Open Source Projects Unstuck (or, in other words: maintaining legacy open source projects. Below is the introduction for the full, forthcoming book.) Who this book is for and what you should get out of it You are about to get an open source project unstuck. Maybe a bunch of work is piling up in the repository and users are getting worried, waiting for a release. Maybe developers have gotten bogged down, trying to finish a big rewrite while maintaining the stable release. Maybe the project's suffering for lack of infrastructure — testing, money, an institutional home. You noticed the problem. So that means it's up to you to fix it. Or you're getting paid to fix it, even though you didn't start this thing. A while ago I blurted out the phrase "dammit-driven leadership." Because sometimes you look around, and you realize something needs doing, and you're the only one who really gets why, so you say, “Dammit, okay, I'll do it, then.” After reading this book, you should be prepared to: 1. Assess a legacy project to decide whether you should get involved. 2. Settle into a legacy project and become a competent and credible contributor. 3. Take charge of a legacy project on a project, people, and financial level. 4. Execute transformative change in a legacy project. 5. Make a legacy project more sustainable, and pass leadership on to someone else. The tech industry glorifies the founders who build “greenfield” projects, meaning they “started from scratch.” But, in my opinion, most of the genuinely valuable work that needs doing is in the “brownfield” — in codebases that already exist. That's particularly true in free and open source software, where, for 30+ years, we've built and publicly shared valuable tools, together. It's a damn shame if those tools go to waste because no one steps up to take care of deferred maintenance. So let's step up. Who this book is NOT for • You've never worked in open source software or contributed to it before. Go read VM Brasseur's book, Forge Your Future with Open Source. • You are starting an entirely new open source project. Go read my advice on starting a new open source project, and then read Karl Fogel's book, Producing Open Source Software. After that, some parts of this book will be useful — sections on meetings, collaboration platforms, money, people management, and so on will be helpful, but you need to read Karl's book first. • You work for an organization that employs all, or nearly all, of the contributors to the open source project. Your system dynamics will be different; you can employ career/job incentives such as hiring, promotion, and termination. You have a budget provided by the org, and the boundaries of the company create a default level of trust and collegiality among contributors. This book gives advice for open source projects where project leaders can’t count on that leverage. Basic assumptions about open source and the tech industries • There is no one tech industry and there is no one open source community. A fruit packing company with an IT department, a UK national government agency's developer team, and a Silicon Valley machine learning startup have different attitudes towards open source investment. A 30-year-old systems programming tool with millions of users has different opportunities and needs compared to a six-year-old library gluing a content management system to a social media platform. • The free software movement and the open source industry are different but intertwined. I often refer to both, combined, as FLOSS (Free/Libre Open Source Software). You do not have to be an ideological free software believer to be a good leader, but you do need to know enough about the free software perspective to avoid accidentally annoying or enraging colleagues, and to protect your project from getting locked into unequal arrangements with commercial users. • Open source contributors, as a population, disproportionately want to code. We have an easy time finding (or being found by) people who want to write features and fix bugs, and integrating these people into our projects. We have a harder time attracting managers, marketers, testers, systems administrators, writers, user experience researchers and designers, customer service experts, event planners, and grant proposal writers, and working well with them and retaining them. Most people who become open source project maintainers did not start out wanting to do maintenance work. They usually wanted to make a cool thing, solve their own needs, or fill a gap that was bothering their peers. They generally had no training, and often have no inclination, regarding long-term product strategy, customer and upstream relationship- building, budgeting and seeking funding, user experience work, and many other necessary disciplines in software leadership. And that’s not a problem, as long as folks with complementary skills can join in and co-lead these projects with them. • Every open source project has a life cycle. Sometimes the best choice for a project is to end it. Many open source projects end through quiet attrition, the founders acknowledging reality years after it ought to be evident (if they ever make a public statement). Far better, for contributors and users, is a planned and announced end-of-life. Giving users a heads-up is respectful and frees them to figure out a new path (including a fork under new management), and choosing to actively end a project frees contributors to move on to projects that can engage with their work and deliver it to users. This is a sampler This book is a first release — a sampler. I'm releasing this sampler, containing three chapters of the book to come plus an outline of the full book, to: • Help gauge the market for the full book. • Share some of what I've learned early. • Get feedback from you — email [email protected] with "Unstuck" in the subject line to tell me what you thought. Conducting a SWOT analysis Problem Read this if your team's running into problems like: Your team has trouble making decisions about what features to implement, what you can deprecate, what platforms/environments to support, how fast the release cadence should be, and related strategic or architectural questions beyond line-level code review and bug- fixing. Your team consistently misses opportunities (such as better tooling/platforms, conference talk slots, grants, or free equipment/travel) because you didn't know they were available, or heard about them too late. Your team gets nastily surprised by new problems over and over, such as a platform vendor ending service, or a competing project adding a killer feature that you don't have. Your team's progress feels frustratingly slow, but no one can pin down why. Reason for the problem The project team doesn't have a shared and current understanding of: • What the project is good for/at, and wants to be/do — fundamentally, why it should exist and keep serving a particular niche, instead of letting competitors serve its users. • Whom you are trying to serve. • What the project is specifically NOT aiming to do/be. • Whom you are specifically NOT trying to serve. • What gets in the way of their users being effective. Those bits of information will help them understand your tool’s positioning (what is it that your tool uniquely does?) and make product differentiation decisions (why should users use it instead of other tools?). The team also doesn't know: • What parts of the current architecture are blocking progress and how urgent it is that they be replaced. • What is happening in the world beyond the project that they'll want to watch out for, to use/leverage or avoid/mitigate. So it's harder for you to prioritize, and to take charge of your own destiny instead of always being reactive. Skills you need to solve the problem I suggest that you do a SWOT analysis, which means taking inventory of your project's • Strengths • Weaknesses • Opportunities • Threats I'll briefly introduce the idea here. You can look around online and find a zillion courses, posts, etc. on how to do a proper or speedy SWOT analysis. So I'll refrain from making yet another redundant one here — I'll focus on how to do one in the context of open source. Note on logistics: In most cases in open source, you should start your work in public and share your work in progress as you go. But this is one of the times that I suggest you do quite a lot of the work in private and make room for some privately-shared sections that would go alongside the public findings. In particular, the "weaknesses" section will probably involve some delicate thoughts on teammates.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Misc Thesisdb Bythesissuperv
    Honors Theses 2006 to August 2020 These records are for reference only and should not be used for an official record or count by major or thesis advisor. Contact the Honors office for official records. Honors Year of Student Student's Honors Major Thesis Title (with link to Digital Commons where available) Thesis Supervisor Thesis Supervisor's Department Graduation Accounting for Intangible Assets: Analysis of Policy Changes and Current Matthew Cesca 2010 Accounting Biggs,Stanley Accounting Reporting Breaking the Barrier- An Examination into the Current State of Professional Rebecca Curtis 2014 Accounting Biggs,Stanley Accounting Skepticism Implementation of IFRS Worldwide: Lessons Learned and Strategies for Helen Gunn 2011 Accounting Biggs,Stanley Accounting Success Jonathan Lukianuk 2012 Accounting The Impact of Disallowing the LIFO Inventory Method Biggs,Stanley Accounting Charles Price 2019 Accounting The Impact of Blockchain Technology on the Audit Process Brown,Stephen Accounting Rebecca Harms 2013 Accounting An Examination of Rollforward Differences in Tax Reserves Dunbar,Amy Accounting An Examination of Microsoft and Hewlett Packard Tax Avoidance Strategies Anne Jensen 2013 Accounting Dunbar,Amy Accounting and Related Financial Statement Disclosures Measuring Tax Aggressiveness after FIN 48: The Effect of Multinational Status, Audrey Manning 2012 Accounting Dunbar,Amy Accounting Multinational Size, and Disclosures Chelsey Nalaboff 2015 Accounting Tax Inversions: Comparing Corporate Characteristics of Inverted Firms Dunbar,Amy Accounting Jeffrey Peterson 2018 Accounting The Tax Implications of Owning a Professional Sports Franchise Dunbar,Amy Accounting Brittany Rogan 2015 Accounting A Creative Fix: The Persistent Inversion Problem Dunbar,Amy Accounting Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act: The Most Revolutionary Piece of Tax Szwakob Alexander 2015D Accounting Dunbar,Amy Accounting Legislation Since the Introduction of the Income Tax Prasant Venimadhavan 2011 Accounting A Proposal Against Book-Tax Conformity in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Release 2021-03
    Metrics Release 2021-03 https://chaoss.community/metrics MIT License Copyright © 2021 CHAOSS a Linux Foundation® Project CHAOSS Contributors include: Aastha Bist, Abhinav Bajpai, Ahmed Zerouali, Akshara P, Akshita Gupta, Amanda Brindle, Anita Ihuman, Alberto Martín, Alberto Pérez García-Plaza, Alexander Serebrenik, Alexandre Courouble, Alolita Sharma, Alvaro del Castillo, Ahmed Zerouali, Amanda Casari, Amy Marrich, Ana Jimenez Santamaria, Andre Klapper, Andrea Gallo, Andy Grunwald, Andy Leak, Aniruddha Karajgi, Anita Sarma, Ankit Lohani, Ankur Sonawane, Anna Buhman, Armstrong Foundjem, Atharva Sharma, Ben Lloyd Pearson, Benjamin Copeland, Beth Hancock, Bingwen Ma, Boris Baldassari, Bram Adams, Brian Proffitt, Camilo Velazquez Rodriguez, Carol Chen, Carter Landis, Chris Clark, Christian Cmehil- Warn, Damien Legay, Dani Gellis, Daniel German, Daniel Izquierdo Cortazar, David A. Wheeler, David Moreno, David Pose, Dawn Foster, Derek Howard, Don Marti, Drashti, Duane O’Brien, Dylan Marcy, Eleni Constantinou, Elizabeth Barron, Emily Brown, Emma Irwin, Eriol Fox, Fil Maj, Gabe Heim, Georg J.P. Link, Gil Yehuda, Harish Pillay, Harshal Mittal, Henri Yandell, Henrik Mitsch, Igor Steinmacher, Ildiko Vancsa, Jacob Green, Jaice Singer Du Mars, Jaskirat Singh, Jason Clark, Javier Luis Cánovas Izquierdo, Jeff McAffer, Jeremiah Foster, Jessica Wilkerson, Jesus M. Gonzalez- Barahona, Jilayne Lovejoy, Jocelyn Matthews, Johan Linåker, John Mertic, Jon Lawrence, Jonathan Lipps, Jono Bacon, Jordi Cabot, Jose Manrique Lopez de la Fuente, Joshua Hickman, Joshua
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2006
    Annual Report 2006 Table of contents Foreword Letter from the Chairman, Dave Neary 4–5 A year in review 2006—a year in GNOME 8–10 Distributions in 2006 11 Events and community initiatives GUADEC—The GNOME Conference 12–13 GNOME hackers descend on MIT Media Center 14–15 GNOME User Groups 16 The www.gnome.org revamp 17 GNOME platform 17 GNOME Foundation Administrator 17 Foundation development The Women’s Summer Outreach Program 18–20 The GNOME Mobile and Embedded Initiative 21 The GNOME Advisory Board 22–23 PHOTO The GNOME Foundation Board and Advisory Board members by David Zeuthen (continued on the inside back cover) GNOME Foundation 3 Dear Friends, All traditions need a starting point, they say. What you now hold in your hands is the first annual report of the GNOME Foundation, at the end of what has been an eventful year for us. Each year brings its challenges and rewards for the members of this global project. This year, many of our biggest challenges are in the legal arena. European countries have been passing laws to conform with the European Union Copyright Directive, and some, including France, have brought into law provisions which we as software developers find it hard to understand, but which appear to make much of what we do illegal. We have found our- selves in the center of patent wars as bigger companies jockey for position with offerings based on our hard work. And we are scratching our heads trying to figure out how to deal with the constraints of DRM and patents in multimedia, while still offering our users access to their media files.
    [Show full text]
  • Large Free Software Projects and Bugzilla Lessons from GNOME Project QA
    Large Free Software Projects and Bugzilla Lessons from GNOME Project QA Luis Villa Ximian, Inc. [email protected], http://tieguy.org/ Abstract itory for quality assurance and patch track- ing. This was not a process without problems- The GNOME project transitioned, during the hackers resisted, QA volunteers did too lit- GNOME 2.0 development and release cycle, tle, or too much, we learned things we need from a fairly typical, mostly anarchic free soft- to know too late, or over-engineered the pro- ware development model to a more disciplined, cess too early. Despite the problems, though, release driven development model. The ed- GNOME learned a great deal and as a result, ucational portion of this paper will focus on GNOME’s latest releases have been more sta- two key components that made the GNOME ble and reliable than ever before (even if far QA model successful: developer/QA interac- from perfect yet :) tion and QA process. Falling into the first cat- The purpose of this paper isn’t to teach some- egory, it will discuss why GNOME develop- one to do QA, or to impress upon the reader ers bought in to the process, how Bugzilla was the need for good QA—other tomes have been made easier for them and for GNOME as a written on each of those subjects. Instead, it whole, and why they still believe in the pro- will focus on QA in a Free Software context— cess despite having been under Bugzilla’s lash how it works in GNOME, what needed to be for more than a year.
    [Show full text]
  • Resolver El Problema: “
    Cuando coges un arma para atacar, lo más natural es que te defiendas. Y somos millones de personas que defenderemos a quien nos liberó y trajo la transparencia desde la oscuridad de internet. Esto es una guerra que ha comenzado por parte de los canceladores de Stallman. Y lo han hecho sin pensarlo mucho, sólo cegados por las mentiras y manipulaciones de los medios afines al complot: Red Hat, Microsoft, Google, Canonical, Justice Social Warriors & gilipolles, al ala más reaccionaria de la sociedad norteamericana, esa hipócrita ante lo más hipócrita. No lo han pensado mucho porque olvidan que somos mayoría. Ellos tienen el dinero, nosotros somos el pueblo y llegaremos hasta el final, hasta que Red Hat salga de la FSF, al igual que la OSI y Microsoft y los reaccionarios fascistas de la cancelación abandonen sus ansias de arruinar al padre del software libre. Somos millones que tomaremos represalias. Ya habéis perdido. He aquí un listado de canceladores hispanos de Richard Stallman y otros personajes que quieren arruinar su vida, y de paso implantar el open source fagocitando el software libre. Son tan convencidos del software libre que casi todos tienen cuentas en Facebook, Twitter, Instagram. El listado de nombres es público y cualquiera puede tener acceso. También se añaden aquellas distribuciones y/o entornos de escritorio que deberíamos no apoyarles económicamente, así como organizaciones. La lista es dinámica y se irán añadiendo nombres conforme vayan firmando. Ruego entiendan que esto no es un listado de personas para ser atacados, sino que por favor, no tengan apoyo económico de la comunidad pro-Stallman.
    [Show full text]
  • Indicators for Missing Maintainership in Collaborative Open Source Projects
    TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT CAROLO-WILHELMINA ZU BRAUNSCHWEIG Studienarbeit Indicators for Missing Maintainership in Collaborative Open Source Projects Andre Klapper February 04, 2013 Institute of Software Engineering and Automotive Informatics Prof. Dr.-Ing. Ina Schaefer Supervisor: Michael Dukaczewski Affidavit Hereby I, Andre Klapper, declare that I wrote the present thesis without any assis- tance from third parties and without any sources than those indicated in the thesis itself. Braunschweig / Prague, February 04, 2013 Abstract The thesis provides an attempt to use freely accessible metadata in order to identify missing maintainership in free and open source software projects by querying various data sources and rating the gathered information. GNOME and Apache are used as case studies. License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) license. Keywords Maintenance, Activity, Open Source, Free Software, Metrics, Metadata, DOAP Contents List of Tablesx 1 Introduction1 1.1 Problem and Motivation.........................1 1.2 Objective.................................2 1.3 Outline...................................3 2 Theoretical Background4 2.1 Reasons for Inactivity..........................4 2.2 Problems Caused by Inactivity......................4 2.3 Ways to Pass Maintainership.......................5 3 Data Sources in Projects7 3.1 Identification and Accessibility......................7 3.2 Potential Sources and their Exploitability................7 3.2.1 Code Repositories.........................8 3.2.2 Mailing Lists...........................9 3.2.3 IRC Chat.............................9 3.2.4 Wikis............................... 10 3.2.5 Issue Tracking Systems...................... 11 3.2.6 Forums............................... 12 3.2.7 Releases.............................. 12 3.2.8 Patch Review........................... 13 3.2.9 Social Media............................ 13 3.2.10 Other Sources..........................
    [Show full text]
  • CHAOSS Metrics
    Metrics Release 202001 https://chaoss.community/metrics MIT License Copyright © 2020 CHAOSS a Linux Foundation® Project CHAOSS Contributors include: Ahmed Zerouali, Akshita Gupta, Amanda Brindle, Alberto Martín, Alberto Pérez García-Plaza, Alexander Serebrenik, Alexandre Courouble, Alolita Sharma, Alvaro del Castillo, Ahmed Zerouali, Ana Jimenez Santamaria, Andre Klapper, Andrea Gallo, Andy Grunwald, Andy Leak, Aniruddha Karajgi, Anita Sarma, Ankit Lohani, Ankur Sonawane, Anna Buhman, Armstrong Foundjem, Atharva Sharma, Ben Lloyd Pearson, Benjamin Copeland, Bingwen Ma, Boris Baldassari, Bram Adams, Brian Proffitt, Camilo Velazquez Rodriguez, Carol Chen, Carter Landis, Chris Clark, Christian Cmehil-Warn, Damien Legay, Dani Gellis, Daniel German, Daniel Izquierdo Cortazar, David A. Wheeler, David Moreno, David Pose, Dawn Foster, Derek Howard, Don Marti, Drashti, Dylan Marcy, Eleni Constantinou, Emma Irwin, Fil Maj, Gabe Heim, Georg J.P. Link, Gil Yehuda, Harish Pillay, Harshal Mittal, Henri Yandell, Henrik Mitsch, Ildiko Vancsa, Jacob Green, Jaice Singer Du Mars, Jason Clark, Javier Luis Cánovas Izquierdo, Jeff McAffer, Jeremiah Foster, Jessica Wilkerson, Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona, Jocelyn Matthews, Johan, Johan Linåker, John Mertic, Jon Lawrence, Jonathan Lipps, Jono Bacon, Jordi Cabot, Jose Manrique Lopez de la Fuente, Joshua R. Simmons, Josianne Marsan, Kate Stewart, Keanu Nichols, Kevin Lumbard, Kristof Van Tomme, Lars, Laura Gaetano, Lawrence Hecht, Leslie Hawthorne, Luis Cañas-Díaz, Luis Villa, Lukasz Gryglicki, Mark Matyas, Martin Coulombe, Matthew Broberg, Matt Germonprez, Matt Snell, Michael Downey, Miguel Ángel Fernández, Mike Wu, Neil Chue Hong, Nick Vidal, Nicole Huesman, Nishchith K Shetty, Nithya Ruff, Parth Sharma, Patrick Masson, Peter Monks, Pranjal Aswani, Prodromos Polychroniadis, Quan Zhou, Ray Paik, Remy DeCausemaker, Robert Lincoln Truesdale III, Robert Sanchez, Rupa Dachere, Saloni Garg, Saleh Motaal, Samantha Logan, Santiago Dueñas, Sarvesh Mehta, Sarah Conway, Sean P.
    [Show full text]
  • GNOME Annual Report 2014
    GNOME Annual Report 2014 GNOME Annual Report 2013 Letter from the GNOME Foundation 3 Hackfests 4 Conferences 6 Internship programs 8 Finances 10 Accessibility 11 Privacy campaign 12 Bugzilla statistics 13 GNOME releases 14 Advisory Board 17 Friends of GNOME 18 Credits 20 1 Letter from the GNOME Foundation It is bittersweet to be introducing the 2013 GNOME annual report. This financial year was my last year as GNOME's Executive Director, as I left the position in March of 2014. However, I'm thrilled to have recently been elected to GNOME's Board of Directors and am happy to continue to contribute to GNOME's future. GNOME is such an important, vibrant project, and I feel lucky to be able to play a part in it. As you will see when you read this annual report, there have been a lot of great things that have happened for the GNOME Foundation during this period. Two new companies joined our advisory board, the Linux Foundation and Private Internet Access. The work funded by our accessibility campaign was completed and we ran a successful campaign for privacy. During this period, there was a fantastic Board of Directors, a dedicated Engagement team (who worked so hard to put this report together), and the conference teams (GNOME.Asia, GUADEC and the Montreal Summit) knocked it out of the park. Most importantly, we’ve had an influx of contributors, more so than I’ve seen in some time. I hope that I have helped us to get in touch with our values during my time as Executive Director and I think that GNOME is more aware of its guiding mission than ever before.
    [Show full text]
  • GNOME Annual Report Fiscal Year 2013
    GNOME Annual Report Fiscal Year 2013 GNOME Annual Report 2013 Letter from the GNOME Foundation 3 Hackfests 4 Conferences 6 Internship programs 8 Finances 10 Accessibility 11 Privacy campaign 12 Bugzilla statistics 13 GNOME releases 14 Advisory Board 17 Friends of GNOME 18 Credits 20 1 Letter from the GNOME Foundation It is bittersweet to be introducing the 2013 GNOME annual report. This financial year was my last year as GNOME's Executive Director, as I left the position in March of 2014. However, I'm thrilled to have recently been elected to GNOME's Board of Directors and am happy to continue to contribute to GNOME's future. GNOME is such an important, vibrant project, and I feel lucky to be able to play a part in it. As you will see when you read this annual report, there have been a lot of great things that have happened for the GNOME Foundation during this period. Two new companies joined our advisory board, the Linux Foundation and Private Internet Access. The work funded by our accessibility campaign was completed and we ran a successful campaign for privacy. During this period, there was a fantastic Board of Directors, a dedicated Engagement team (who worked so hard to put this report together), and the conference teams (GNOME.Asia, GUADEC and the Montreal Summit) knocked it out of the park. Most importantly, we’ve had an influx of contributors, more so than I’ve seen in some time. I hope that I have helped us to get in touch with our values during my time as Executive Director and I think that GNOME is more aware of its guiding mission than ever before.
    [Show full text]
  • Planet GNOME
    GNOME. 101 choses à savoir... mais seulement 10 d'entre elles sont réellement importantes Êtes-vous confortablement installés ? Alors allons-y... ● GNOME, né en Août 1997, est le bébé de 2 mexicains, Miguel de Icaza et Federico Mena Quintero, créant ainsi une alternative de bureau libre, basée sur la GPL. Des débuts sexy + = qui sentent pas très bon Qu'est-ce que GNOME ? ● Le projet GNOME fournit deux choses : – L'environnement de bureau GNOME, un bureau intuitif et attirant pour les utilisateurs finaux. – La plate-forme de développement GNOME, un large framework pour construire des applications qui s'intègrent avec le reste du bureau. ● GNOME est un ensemble de logiciels libres, ainsi qu'une partie du projet GNU, dont le but est de donner aux utilisateurs le niveau de contrôle ultime sur leur bureau, leurs programmes et leurs données. Pourquoi GNOME ? ● GNOME est le bureau choisi par des grands noms de l'industrie comme HP, IBM, Novell, Red Hat et Sun Microsystems. ● GNOME est déjà utilisé dans de grands déploiements gouvernementaux, dans des lieux aussi divers que l'Estrémadure (Espagne) et Pékin (Chine). ● GNOME est le moyen idéal pour réduire les coûts et améliorer la fiabilité. Vous n'avez pas à payer de licences. Un petit tour rapide du bureau... ● Comme la plupart des bureaux, GNOME inclut un gestionnaire de fichiers, un navigateur web et un client email, ainsi qu'une importante quantité d'applications. Le gestionnaire de fichiers Nautilus (en mode spatial) Crée des vignettes de vos images Affiche un aperçu de vos fichiers texte Un petit tour rapide du bureau..
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Continuous Integration?
    Continuous integration for GNOME Juan José Sánchez Penas <[email protected]> Guadec 2006, Vilanova i la Geltrú Proposed table of contents ● What is continuous integration? ● Why CI for Gnome? ● History of CI inside the GNOME project ● Present of CI inside the GNOME project ● Goals of the continous integration ● Discussion about the available tools: – C.I. tools: jhautobuild, tinderbox, bulidbot,... – Value added tools: check, gcov,... ● Creation of the continous integration team ● Definition of the roadmap for the next year 2 Continuous integration for Gnome ± Guadec 2006, Vilanova i la Geltrú What is Continuous Integration (CI)? ● Wikipedia defines it as follows: – Continuous Integration is a software engineering term describing a process that completely rebuilds and tests an application frequently. – Tipically refers to the eXtreme Programming practice. – The more popular form (also called Automated Continuous Integration) takes the form of a server process or daemon that monitors a version control system and automatically runs the build process (and then runs test scripts). 3 Continuous integration for Gnome ± Guadec 2006, Vilanova i la Geltrú Why CI for Gnome? ● Detect new errors in the software - early. ● Automatic testing: unit testing, functional testing, performance (speed and memory), code coverage, functionality texting...) ● The Pango/Cairo problem in Federico's Keynote could be detected automatically. ● ... 4 Continuous integration for Gnome ± Guadec 2006, Vilanova i la Geltrú History of CI inside GNOME ● Before? ● Summer
    [Show full text]
  • Table Des Matières Annexe 1
    Table des matières Annexe 1. Exemple de page de projet.........................................................................................2 Annexe 2. Exemple de code avec du commentaire.....................................................................2 Annexe 3. Liste des acteurs interviewés.....................................................................................3 Annexe 4. Un exemple de page personnelle...............................................................................6 Annexe 5. Texte de la licence GPL.............................................................................................8 Annexe 6. Définition de l'Open Source. Version 1.0 (1998)....................................................11 Annexe 7. La philosophie du projet Freenet : exemple de l'idéologie de l'information ouverte. ...................................................................................................................................................12 Annexe 8. Charte de la fondation du projet Gnome.................................................................14 Annexe 9. Exemple de rapport de bogue..................................................................................19 Annexe 10. Carte de développeurs et d'utilisateurs..................................................................19 Annexe 11. Liste des électeurs de la fondation Gnome (2005)................................................22 Annexe 12. Exemple de page de discussion sur Wikipédia. ....................................................22
    [Show full text]