• 
• 
• 

 1 of 3

Gallery

The making of open-source software

Posted on 20 Jan 2012 at 16:06

“We’ve completely failed to achieve a 100% conversion rate,” admits Canonical founder Mark Shuttleworth. “There are those who remain unconvinced – and loudly so. I was responding to a bug comment today where someone was saying ‘I’m feeling unloved and ignored and abandoned because you won’t move that launcher to the right of the screen’.

We’ve completely failed to achieve a 100% conversion rate

“There are perspectives that are raised that I wouldn’t have thought of, and quite possibly no-one at Canonical would have thought of. As we go through that process, it’s sometimes difficult to agree to disagree. Someone who feels unloved may be expressing that the consensus or leadership view doesn’t follow with what they think it should be. But that’s life.”

And all of that discussion means the process is slower than traditional development models. “Open-source software tends to take a little bit longer to develop, because there are these feedback loops,” says Red Hat’s Smith.

Delay benefits

Those delays and arguments have their benefits. Mozilla’s Heilmann points out more eyes on code means more bugs are caught, while his colleague notes that the open process means everything is public, so no one person can control an area of code.

“That’s the biggest problem with closed software,” Papadeas says. “Every company I’ve worked for that’s closed has an expert – most of the time someone who’s just interested in a topic – that stays at the company too long, and is the expert the whole time."

"Nobody actually coaches a replacement, and when that person leaves the company, you have a big issue," he says. "In open source, that will never happen because everything is public.”

Our deeply held belief is that working with a community makes for a richer, more interesting product

The model’s transparency could be a lesson for companies beyond those developing software. “I wish more companies were as open as we are, because nothing can go wrong,” Heilmann claims. “If everything you do is in the public, then you know you have to behave. When it isn’t public, things are hidden and money is wasted on projects nobody needs.”

For millions using open-source software, there’s one thing that matters: whether it works – and works better than proprietary alternatives.

“Our deeply held belief is that working with a community makes for a richer, more interesting product,” says Shuttleworth. “I have no doubt that it will be a different product because of that approach. It’s an article of faith for us that it will be a better one for having done so.”

Author: Nicole Kobie