![Surveying Industrial Roles in Open Source Software Development Øyvind Hauge, Carl-Fredrik Sørensen, Andreas Røsdal [email_address] Øyvind Hauge, Carl-Fredrik Sørensen and Andreas Røsdal, Surveying Industrial Roles in Open Source Software Development, in: Proceedings of the 3rd IFIP Working Group 2.13 International Conference on Open Source Software (OSS2007) - Open Source Development, Adoption and Innovation , June 11-14, Limerick, Ireland, pages 259--264, Springer, 2007 Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-72486-7_25](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/oss2007oyvindhauge-090829154910-phpapp02/85/OSS2007-Oyvind-Hauge-1-320.jpg)
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to OSS2007 Øyvind Hauge
Similar to OSS2007 Øyvind Hauge (20)
More from Øyvind Hauge
More from Øyvind Hauge (9)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
OSS2007 Øyvind Hauge
- 1. Surveying Industrial Roles in Open Source Software Development Øyvind Hauge, Carl-Fredrik Sørensen, Andreas Røsdal [email_address] Øyvind Hauge, Carl-Fredrik Sørensen and Andreas Røsdal, Surveying Industrial Roles in Open Source Software Development, in: Proceedings of the 3rd IFIP Working Group 2.13 International Conference on Open Source Software (OSS2007) - Open Source Development, Adoption and Innovation , June 11-14, Limerick, Ireland, pages 259--264, Springer, 2007 Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-72486-7_25
- 2. Motivation and purpose $ ?
- 9. OSS used as commodity/infrastructure
- 10. Challenges related to maintenance
- 15. Driven by need for product
- 19. Initialization of OSS projects
- 20. How to benefit from community contribution
Editor's Notes
- Construction of software : More and more complex, only small parts are differentiating. OSS gives opportunities : Market place for services and products, re-useable components, and development practices. Dell sells computers with Linux. Industrial investments : In (their own) OSS, the use of OSS, and in OSS development practices. IBM claimed to have invested $ 1 billion in OSS and participated in more than 100 OSS projects We know little about it : Few empirical studies have sheded light on this field. Purpose: Explore how and why industry approaches OSS.
- The literature study: resulted in a definition of the following four roles OSS Provider: Have their own OSS products OSS Integrator: Use OSS components in their software solutions OSS Participant: Participates in OSS projects outside the company ISS Participant: Participates in Inner Source Software development. ISS is development within a company or consortium of companies where development practices often associated with large OSS communities are applied. GOAL : To explore why do industrial actors undertake these four roles, the challenges and advantages related to undertaking them, and which development practices are used in these roles.
- Semi-structured interviews with the Norwegian partners of the project. An OSS consultant company 75-100 1 developer A company living of their own OSS products 75-100 1/2 developer(s), and the CEO A small company using OSS in their own development 2 developers Recorded and transcribed Web-based questionnaire: Developed based on the interviews Reflects the four roles with four main parts: OSS provider, integrator, participant and ISS parcicipant Primarily closed questions, but also some open questions CONTEXT: COSI, a research project. Industrial and academic participants from several countries : Sweden, Spain, Netherlands, Finland, and Norway Embedded systems but also more traditional software developers: PHILIPS, NOKIA, Meritie, Gamelion, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Helsinki School of Economics (HSE), ICT-Norway, Telvent Telefonica I+D, European Software Institute (ESI), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Combitech Systems, Högskolan i Skövde
- Availability of high quality components and honest information Low price Standard compliance Informal searches, through experience, or friends/colleagues Community and web-pages give a lot of information about the component and the activity around the component. New evaluation criteria : Properties Licenses, language, reputation, source code etc Activity: Releases, messages in community, #bugs, bug-fixes
- Added value from the community Direct contributions: Testing, requirements, add-on’s, bug reports, translations, bug fixes, new ideas Indirect contributions: Access to new customers by increased value, high availability, possibly more publicity Requires hard work to benefit from a community Maintain communication/activity Review all contributions Respond to requests Educated community Infrastructure Participation driven by need for product: Learning was also mentioned. Moderate/low participation: If they had a fix or experienced a bug ISS Participation : Tool driven: Code repositories -> shared view of the code, module owners, early releases, communication tools as e-mail/mailing lists
- Few respondents Little control over how answered Population: is perhaps not typical for all IT companies (COSI project) Reviewed both by COSI and by ITEA without any correcting feedback