1 Understanding Free/Open Source Software Development Practices Walt Scacchi Institute for Software...
-
Upload
blaze-simmons -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 Understanding Free/Open Source Software Development Practices Walt Scacchi Institute for Software...
1
Understanding Free/Open Source Software
Development Practices
Walt ScacchiInstitute for Software Research
School of Information and Computer ScienceUniversity of California, Irvine
Irvine, CA 92697-3425 [email protected]
23 November 2004
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~wscacchi/Presentations/COSST/Practices.ppt
2
3
4
5
6
Overview
• Background
• Research methodology
• Free/Open source processes and practices
• Implications
• Conclusions
• New projects
7
What is free/open source software development?
• Free (as in “freedom”) vs. open source– Freedom to access, browse/view, study, modify and
redistribute the source code– Free is always open, but open is not always free
• F/OSSD is not “software engineering”– Different: F/OSSD can be faster, better, and cheaper
than SE• F/OSSD involves more software development tools, Web
resources, and personal computing resources
8
Who is investing in OSSD?• Large corporations/enterprises:
– IBM-Eclipse, Sun-NetBeans and OpenOffice, HP-Gelato, Apple-Darwin, Microsoft Research-Rotor, etc.
– Barclays Global Investors, DKW, Merrill Lynch, etc.– DoD, DoE, NSF, NIH, NASA, etc.– MIT, Stanford, CMU, UC, UMichigan, etc.
• Mid-size corporations:– RedHat, Novell, Borland
• Small (start-up) companies:– ActiveState, Collab.Net, Jabber, Ximian, JBoss,
Compiere, etc.
9
Research methodology
• Prior empirical (case) studies of Open Source Software Development (OSSD) Projects– Mockus, Fielding, Herbsleb, 2000, 2002, Apache httpd server– Reis and Fortes, 2002, Mozilla Web browser– Schach et al., 2002; Holt et al., 2000, Linux Kernel– Koch and Schneider 2001; German 2002, GNOME User
Interface– Jorgensen, 2001, FreeBSD operating system– Garg et al., 2002, OSSD (“progressive open source”) within HP– Jensen and Scacchi, 2003-04, NetBeans IDE– Etc.
10
Research methodology
• Individual case studies: significant details, but limited (and premature) generalization, little/no comparative analysis
• Few studies that examine multiple OSSD projects in multiple domains– Such studies would offer higher degree of
comparative analyses and generalization of results
11
12
Research methodology
• Comparative case studies– Multiple open software development projects
• Within and across multiple communities
• Qualitative (“grounded theory”) techniques• Analyzing and modeling
– development processes– work practices and roles– development artifacts and tools– community structures and process dynamics
13
Sample practices for F/OSSD
• Requirements and design• Configuration management and work
coordination• Maintenance/Evolution• Project management/career development• Software technology transfer and licensing
14
F/OSS Processes for Requirements or Design
• F/OSS Requirements/Designs – not explicit– not formal
• F/OSS Requirements/Designs are embedded within “informalisms”– Example OSS informalisms to follow (as
screenshot displays)
• F/OSS Requirements/Design processes are different from their SE counterparts.
15
SE vs. F/OSS processes for Requirements
• Elicitation• Analysis
• Specification and modeling
• Validation
• Communicating and managing
• Post-hoc assertion• Reading, sense-making,
accountability• Continually emerging
webs of discourse• Condensing and
hardening discourse• Global access to
discourse
16
17
18
19
20
21
Retrospectiverequirementsspecification
example
22
Configuration management and work coordination
• Use CM to coordinate and control who gets to update what part of the system/online artifacts– Many F/OSSD projects use CVS (single centralized
code repository with update locks) and frequent releases (daily releases on active projects)
– Linux Kernel: BitKeeper (multiple parallel builds and release repositories)
– Collab.Net and Tigris.org: Subversion (CVS++)– Apache: Single major release, with frequent “patch”
releases (e.g., “A patchy server”)– GNU arch seeks to develop Free CM unification
23
Concurrentversion
system (CVS) for coordinating
source codeupdates
24
Evolutionary redevelopment, reinvention, and redistribution
• Overall evolutionary dynamic of F/OSSD is reinvention– Reinvention enables continuous improvement
• F/OSS evolve through minor mutations– Expressed, recombined, redistributed via incremental releases
• F/OSS systems co-evolve with their development community– Success of one depends on the success of the other
• Closed legacy systems may be revitalized via opening and redistribution of their source– When enthusiastic user-developers want their cultural experience
with such systems to be maintained.
25
Revitalizinglegacy
applicationsvia
open source
example
26
Project management and career development
• F/OSSD projects self-organize as a pyramid meritocracy via virtual project management– Meritocracies embrace incremental mutations over
radical innovations– VPM requires people to act in leadership roles based
on skill, availability, and belief in project community
• F/OSS developers want to learn about new stuff (tools, techniques, skills, etc.), have fun buildin g software, exercise their technical skill, try out new kinds of systems to develop, and/or interconnect multiple F/OSSD projects (freedom of choice and expression).
27(images from A.J. Kim, Community Building on the Web, 2000)
A pyramid meritocracy and role hierarchy for F/OSSD
28
Virtual project
managementexample
29
Exampleof
F/OSS developmentpatterns that
encourage havingfun and getting
a new job
30
Software technology transfer and licensing
• F/OSS technology transfer from existing Web sites is a community and team building process– Not (yet) an engineering process– Enables unanticipated applications and uses– Enables F/OSSD to persist without centrally planned
and managed corporate software development centers
31
Example of F/OSS
technology transferthat enabled
creation of newkind of application(e.g., online virtual
dancing)
32
Free/OSS licenses
Reiterate and institutionalize F/OSS culture (values, norms, and beliefs)– GNU Public License (GPL) for free software– More than 40 other open source licenses
(http://opensource.org)– “Creative Commons” Project at Stanford Law
School developing public license framework
33
34
Implications
• F/OSSD is a community building process– not just a technical development process– F/OSS peer review creates a community of peers
• F/OSSD processes often iterate daily versus infrequent singular (milestone) Software Life Cycle Engineering events– F/OSSD: frequent, rapid cycle time (easier to
improve) vs.– SLC: infrequent, slow cycle time (harder to
improve)
35
Conclusions
• Developing F/OSS is different than software engineering– not better, not worse, but different and new– more social, more accessible, more convivial
• F/OSS systems don’t need and probably won’t benefit from classic software engineering.
36
New projects
• Free/Open source science learning games (Discovery Science Center)
• F/OSSD+CSCW+Games => Computer-Supported Cooperative Organizational Learning Environments (CSCOLE -- Naval Postgraduate School and others)
• OSSD+Games+Grid Computing => Game Grids (UCGameLab.net, Cal(IT)2, SDSC, SUN, Butterfly.net, DIP-Daegu City)
37
Open sourcesoftware research
Web site atUCI
38
Acknowledgements
• Project collaborators: – Mark Ackerman, UMichigan, Ann Arbor – Les Gasser, UIllinois, Urbana-Champaign– John Noll, Santa Clara University– Margaret Ellliot, Chris Jensen, UCI-ISR– Julia Watson, The Ohio State University– And others ar ISR
• Funding support:– National Science Foundation: #0083075, #0205679,
#0205724, and #-#0350754. – No endorsement implied.
39
References see http://www.ics.uci.edu/~wscacchi
• W. Scacchi, Understanding the Requirements for Developing Open Source Software, IEE Proceedings--Software, 149(1), 24-39, 2002.
• W. Scacchi, Open EC/B: A Case Study in Electronic Commerce and Open Source Software Development, Final Report, July 2002.
• W. Scacchi, Free/Open Source Software Development Practices in the Computer Game Community, IEEE Software, Special Issue on Open Source Software, (to appear, 2004).
• W. Scacchi, Understanding Free/Open Source Software Evolution: Applying, Breaking and Rethinking the Laws of Software Evolution, revised version to appear in N.H. Madhavji, M.M. Lehman, J.F. Ramil and D. Perry (eds.), Software Evolution, John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, 2004.