Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Apr 2008 10:38:36 -0500 | From | "Fred Trotter" <> | Subject | Introducing Fredux: a redundant project |
| |
Hi, This message is not actually about a new project. It is also not about the Linux Kernel specifically. Rather, I have a question about how your community operates. If you feel this is off-topic, please feel free to ignore it entirely. If you feel that this is off-topic but interesting (my hope) then feel free to email me directly at fred.trotter@gmail.com rather than gum up the mailing list with a 'community' discussion. While this is marginally off-topic, note that it is a discussion of principles that have been cited frequently on this list, in the context of what is, and is not, appropriate behavior:
http://groups.google.com/group/fa.linux.kernel/msg/dde6a60d7c57b8ee http://groups.google.com/group/fa.linux.kernel/msg/706c1ced8dd711a7
I work in the very, very small FOSS community focused on making healthcare applications. Recently, we had a completely redundant project start, and begin competing for attention and resources. I called the project manager and chided him for dividing our community resources. He had not even heard of the mature alternatives to his project, yet he refused to consider that his project and marketing was harmful to our larger community. This is much more important for us than it is for kernel hackers, because our entire community, covering all the health IT projects, is smaller than the kernel community. Dividing the community is a critical problem for us. Eric Raymond has written extensively on the violence that unwelcome forks do to the community.
http://catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/homesteading/ar01s03.html
However, there is not much yet written about how new projects can have a similar detrimental effect. Most of the people I have talked to about this in my own community agree with me on this, however when I publicly chide this new project manager in more generally Healthcare IT communities I come off looking like a bully. I think this because there is no "written rule" about this issue, so it seems like I am arbitrarily attacking this new project. So I wrote a short article outlining my position. It is available here:
http://www.fredtrotter.com/2007/11/27/foss-sin-pointless-duplication-of-effort/
Central to the article is a discussion of a hypothetical project started by me, in competition to the Linux Kernel, called Fredux. Fredux is intended to represent everything bad about starting a new redundant project. Then I compare the hypothetical Fredux to Linux, OpenBSD and Hurd. Linux being the "dominate" project while Hurd and OpenBSD represent projects that justify their existence in the context of a solid dominate project.
So much of my argument is based on using the Linux community as the center of an example, that I thought I should take a moment and ask you what you thought of my thesis? What makes a new project legitimate versus an also-ran? Later I will ask other communities this same question but I wanted to start with the community I use in my examples. Here is my current list of what might make a new project legitimate:
* The project uses a different programming language, which has some advantage in the field of inquiry. * The project addresses a serious feature gap in current projects. * The project addresses a serious design limitation in current projects. * The project uses a new programming paradigm that has advantages over those currently in use. * The project uses a different development process that might have some advantages. * The project uses a more common and accepted FOSS license than alternative projects.
Recognizing that your community, given its strength and size, probably does not care much about competition, I wanted to get a feel of what the "rules" might look like in your opinion. Feel free to contact me off-line or post responses to the article directly rather than replying here.
Regards,
-- Fred Trotter http://www.fredtrotter.com
| |