0f3e8f2a06
The purpose of this patch is to edit the 'Introduction' section of the Four Opens book. It is the first change of a series that will go through the entire book to make the text read more neutral and cohesive to make it ready to publish. Change-Id: I7829fdfa3cca374032cc99cac4cc3479e694b877 Signed-off-by: Ildiko Vancsa <ildiko.vancsa@gmail.com>
114 lines
6.0 KiB
ReStructuredText
114 lines
6.0 KiB
ReStructuredText
============
|
||
Introduction
|
||
============
|
||
|
||
|
||
This book is for the lost souls to guide them through the intricacies,
|
||
challenges and joys of building, maintaining, supporting and participating in
|
||
well balanced and sustainable open source communities.
|
||
|
||
Open source has become a loaded term over the past few decades while many
|
||
people still associate it with free software. While the access to source code
|
||
is directly implied in the term, under various license options that this book
|
||
will not discuss, the focus is shifting towards how the software gets created
|
||
by communities that are formed by a group of individuals who need to be able
|
||
to work together in an open environment while they often employed by companies
|
||
that are competitors.
|
||
|
||
What is the key to success to make open collaboration successful? How can you
|
||
participate in a community and help make it thrive? What are the most
|
||
important principles to follow during your journey?
|
||
|
||
This book will give you answers to these questions by describing a set of
|
||
guiding principles called The Four Opens that was originally defined by the
|
||
OpenStack community and helped them as well as other projects to thrive in the
|
||
open source ecosystem.
|
||
|
||
|
||
History
|
||
-------
|
||
|
||
Before jumping in the middle of The Four Opens let’s have a short tour in
|
||
history to understand where the need and the ideas came from. Originally, they
|
||
came from a need to do things differently.
|
||
|
||
Free software started in the 80’s by defining four (initially three)
|
||
freedoms [#fourfreedoms]_ that any free software should grant its
|
||
users:
|
||
|
||
* Freedom 0: freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose
|
||
* Freedom 1: freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does
|
||
your computing as you wish
|
||
* Freedom 2: freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
|
||
* Freedom 3: freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others
|
||
|
||
These freedoms made the participants free to improve the program, and release
|
||
their improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits. But
|
||
free software did not mandate anything about how the software was to be built
|
||
to actually encourage this collaboration across boundaries that would result
|
||
in benefiting the whole community.
|
||
|
||
When open source was defined in 1998, it focused on a specific angle (the one
|
||
that mattered the most to businesses), which is the availability and
|
||
re-usability of the code. That also said remarkably little about how the
|
||
software should be built, and nothing about who really controls it. As a result
|
||
by 2010 most open source projects were actually closed one way or another:
|
||
their core development may be done behind closed walls, or their governance may
|
||
be locked down to ensure control by its main sponsor. Sure, their end product
|
||
was licensed under an open source license, but those were not really community
|
||
projects anymore.
|
||
|
||
The control of a specific party over the code is discouraging contributors to
|
||
participate: those are seen as free labor and are not on a level playing field
|
||
compared to contributors "on the inside", which really decide the direction of
|
||
the software. The only option for a disgruntled community is to do a costly
|
||
fork of the project, and fragment the limited resources available to work on
|
||
that topic. The most extreme case is the open core variant, where a company
|
||
maintains the basic functions of the software as an open source "community"
|
||
project but keeps advanced "enterprise" features under proprietary licenses.
|
||
This inevitably creates tension when a user wants to contribute back an
|
||
improvement (like security or scalability) that the controlling entity would
|
||
prefer to keep for its Enterprise edition. All this control ultimately hurts
|
||
the adoption and the success of the software.
|
||
|
||
OpenStack is an open source community that was started with the belief that a
|
||
community of equals, working together in an open collaboration, would produce
|
||
better software, more aligned to the needs of its users and more largely
|
||
adopted. It was therefore started from the first day as an open collaboration
|
||
willing to include as many individuals and organizations as possible, on a
|
||
level playing field, with everyone involved in designing and developing the
|
||
solution.
|
||
|
||
This was relatively novel: while a few venerable projects like the Linux kernel
|
||
were set up and perdured as truly open collaborations, most new projects in
|
||
2010 were just owned by a "main sponsor". This is why it was pretty important
|
||
for the individuals who participated in the OpenStack community to state in a
|
||
very concise way what they really meant by 'open'. It was also important to
|
||
clearly distinguish themselves from prevalent open core solutions like
|
||
Eucalyptus, which was then the only open source cloud infrastructure platform
|
||
available.
|
||
|
||
It was from these conditions that "The Four Opens" were born. The first public
|
||
mention of them was posted on the then-nascent OpenStack Wiki on June 28,
|
||
2010 [#fouropenswiki]_, before OpenStack was even publicly discussed or
|
||
announced. The titles of the Four Opens (Open Source, Open Design, Open
|
||
Development, Open Community) were set from that day. The content evolved a bit
|
||
over time on the Wiki, as implementation details rolled in (for example: public
|
||
code reviews, design summits, technical committee, lazy and consensus). The
|
||
Four Opens description is now maintained officially in the OpenStack governance
|
||
website [#fouropens]_ and followed by several projects in the open source
|
||
ecosystem.
|
||
|
||
They were instrumental in the success, the quality and the visibility of the
|
||
OpenStack software as well as the growth of the community from tens of
|
||
contributors to thousands over the course of a few years.
|
||
|
||
As this book will show how The Four Opens transform open source into open
|
||
collaboration that is essential to create open source software and other
|
||
artifacts by a group of individuals and organizations who have a set of common
|
||
goals and challenges they choose to solve together.
|
||
|
||
.. [#fourfreedoms] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
|
||
.. [#fouropenswiki] https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Open&oldid=9628
|
||
.. [#fouropens] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/opens.html
|