... and thanks to the topic starter for the great topic. 23.09.2015 17:48 пользователь "Jim Jagielski" <j...@jagunet.com> написал:
> Yeah, that's pretty much the way I'm looking at it. To me though, just > as gravity is what pulls the pendulum back down to its mid-point, for > Open Source, it's the "true Open Source" community (or, if you prefer, > the "real" one) which acts as gravity, and pulls the pendulum back > to 'b'. But if that real community doesn't exist, then the pendulum > never swings back. > > As long as we are talking mechanical analogies, one I like to use isn't > the pendulum but rather the fly-ball governor on a Watt steam engine[1]. > In this case, when the internal temperature gets too high, the spin of > the governor speeds up, which releases steam and the temp goes down; when > the internal temperature goes down too low, the spin is slower, and it > closes a valve which increases pressure and temp... In our case, the > meritocratic open source governance model is the base operating mode (b) > whereas a and c are the 2 extremes. Where I see a problem is when (b) > is no longer considered the "right" or "optimal" mode, and instead > the default "regulated" mode is set closer to 'a' or 'c'; My point is that > this set-point can, and *is* controlled but all the players in the > open source community, but we are in "danger" of 'b' no longer > being the desired mode simply because those who favor 'b' are no > longer active in wanting that... We need to ensure that 'b' being > the correct/right/optimal set-point for "how open source should be" > is always being "pushed", always being fostered, always being nurtured. > > BTW: Thx for all the comments, this is VERY VERY useful! > > > 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_governor > > On Sep 23, 2015, at 2:27 AM, Ross Gardler <ross.gard...@microsoft.com> > wrote: > > > > I reckon Jim is describing a different kind of pendulum (see my earlier > essay - sorry I got on a roll with that one). > > > > Jim's pendulum is something like: > > > > Let a = autocratic open source governance (vendor owned/benevolent > dictator) > > Let b = meritocratic open source governance > > Let c = fully distributed open source governance (GitHub style fork and > forget - note not all GitHub projects are this style) > > > > The interesting thing is that I don't think we are really at point c, I > think we are really at point a. The numbers point to c but many rock-star > projects are at point a. I'd argue that this goes hand in hand with my > argument that open source is currently more about the business model than > the development model. As with the other pendulum I believe this one will > swing back towards the center as those companies realize that there is a > glass ceiling to their growth using that model (if you haven't read Henrik > Ingo's paper [1] on this you should). > > > > Another interesting point about this spectrum is that while (if history > repeats) there will be a swing past b and towards c this side of the swing > is much shorter. I guess because any "fork and forget" projects that > succeed will typically become either an autocratic or meritocratic project > in order to scale. > > > > As with my other pendulum thought experiment I believe we sit at the > "sensible" place on that spectrum (point b). That isn't today it's the only > place that can work, but that it is where it works for the Apache Way. I > think plenty of people still do this for the fun (and education). Speaking > personally a recent change in my dayjob role means that I'm coding for fun > again - so that's at least one person going in the opposite direction to > the one Jim sees is the majority (lucky me!) > > > > Ross > > > > [1] > http://openlife.cc/blogs/2010/november/how-grow-your-open-source-project-10x-and-revenues-5x > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 7:01 PM > > To: dev@community.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Passion and vigilance in open source > > > > I would be OK with us getting older and forgetting the child-like wonder > (but I don't think that's the case; well, we *are* getting older, but not > forgetting the wonder), IF we were seeing the child-like wonder being > continued, esp by the next gen. > > > > Some see Github as "proof" that the wonder is still there; even if so, > then it's a different kind of 'wonder' and one which is risky for the > continuation of open source. > > > > Wonder is not being able to fork a project, make some patches, submit a > bunch of pull requests and then get a handful of them committed upstream... > That is so.... solitary. The wonder is working *with* and collaborating > *with* and reaching consensus > > *with* a group of similarly-minded individuals towards a common goal. > The wonder is the community. And I think that that is something which is at > risk. > > > > To me, Open Source provided an avenue that allowed coders (and other > contributors) to finally work together, openly and honestly, transparently > and meritocractically (if you get my meaning); it fostered sharing, but not > by letting someone share our toys by playing with them by themselves in > some corner of the sandbox. It was about us all sharing the toys to build a > great sand castle all together in that sandbox, when before we couldn't. > > > > Are people doing it for fun? Are people seeing the joy and wonder in our > eyes? Or are people doing it just because "that's what I get paid to do"? > > > > Good questions. Not simple answers :) > > > >> On Sep 22, 2015, at 4:35 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Jim, > >> > >> Is that really happening? Is the fun leaving? Or is it we are all > >> just getting old and are forgetting the child-like wonder? > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> Some of you may know that I've started a Vlog series on Youtube > >>> around some topics I find interesting, mostly around open source. > >>> > >>> My latest is about the risks around open source today where the fun > >>> and passion that used to exist around open source is drying up or > >>> being discounted. Since Apache is one of the still remaining oasis of > >>> open source being all about community and fun whilst still changing > >>> the world, I'd like to ask for some thoughts from the membership > >>> about their concerns, etc... that I can fold into the 2nd part of > >>> this mini-series. > >>> > >>> If so, please contact me directly. I have set the Reply-To header > >>> accordingly. > >>> > >>> Thx! > >>> > > > >
