This document discusses open source contribution in the enterprise. It provides a case study of how one company contributed patches and worked with the open source community to integrate new versions of an automounter over 15 years. Contributing provides benefits like reduced integration effort, more rapid adoption of new versions, and collaboration on problem solving. The document outlines the contribution process and managing issues like code reviews, licenses, documentation, and communication forums when participating in an open source community.

1. Open Source in the
Enterprise
NickWilliams

2. [OPTIONAL DESCRIPTOR] 2[PRESENTATION NAME AND | OR DATE]
Background: MorganStanley

3. [OPTIONAL DESCRIPTOR] 3[PRESENTATION NAME AND | OR DATE]
CaseStudy inContribution:TheAutomounter
• Integrating new versions took considerable time.
• More than 10 versions of the automounter released in the last 15 years, still going
strong.
• By contributing our patches and working with the community, we have:
– Saved effort on integrating new versions.
– More rapidly adopted new versions.
– Able to adopt new distributions with minimal risk.
– Collaborated over problems with the community.

4. [OPTIONAL DESCRIPTOR] 4[PRESENTATION NAME AND | OR DATE]
Benefits ofContribution
• Open source allows you to avoid private forks that cause a non-competitive
maintenance burden.
• Contributing demonstrates that your enterprise is an active participant in the
community.
• Open source mitigates risk from:
– Software obsolescence.
– Vulnerabilities or bugs through insufficient review.

5. [OPTIONAL DESCRIPTOR] 5[PRESENTATION NAME AND | OR DATE]
Contribution Process
Contributor
Management
Legal and
Compliance

6. [OPTIONAL DESCRIPTOR] 6[PRESENTATION NAME AND | OR DATE]
Contributor: Managing the Distribution
Software Contributions
• Data leakage protection:
– Code review.
– DLP tools.
• How do you get the software to the manager of
the software? Email, GIT pull request, etc?
• Need to bring in next version containing
contribution and validate successful integration.
Managed Projects
• Data leakage protection:
– Code review.
– DLP tools.
• How do you push software to the external
repository?
• How do you manage pull requests/patch
submissions?
• How do you manage bug reports?

7. [OPTIONAL DESCRIPTOR] 7[PRESENTATION NAME AND | OR DATE]
Legal &Compliance: Managing the Distribution
Software Contributions
• Reviewing target contribution agreement (if one
exists).
• Reviewing:
– Code review.
– DLP tools.
• How do you get the software to the manager of
the software? Email, GIT pull request, etc?
• Need to bring in next version containing
contribution and validate successful integration.
Managed Projects
• Data leakage protection:
– Code review.
– DLP tools.
• How do you push software to the external
repository?
• How do you manage pull requests/patch
submissions?
• How do you manage bug reports?

8. [OPTIONAL DESCRIPTOR] 8[PRESENTATION NAME AND | OR DATE]
Legal &Compliance:Questions for theContributor
• What license do you want to use?
• Who wrote the code? Under what contracts?
• What artefacts with their own licenses are distributed with this software?
• What forums will the team use for discussion of this open source?
• How to manage a contribution agreement?

9. [OPTIONAL DESCRIPTOR] 9[PRESENTATION NAME AND | OR DATE]
Building aCommunity

10. [OPTIONAL DESCRIPTOR] 10[PRESENTATION NAME AND | OR DATE]
CommunityChallenges
Forums
• Who can communicate?Approvals? Review?
Documentation
• What is it?
• In open source, customers are disconnected from
providers. Documentation is all that they get…
• “HelloWorld” – show something fast!
• Documentation aimed at the audience.
• Label experimental code.
• Documentation is the priority.
Activity
• Where is the canonical source?

11. [OPTIONAL DESCRIPTOR] 11[PRESENTATION NAME AND | OR DATE]
Conclusions
• Open Source is never free
• Open Source is worth the effort