Why Open Source Governance Matters
Download as PPTX, PDF2 likes2,197 views
The document discusses open source governance and moving open source projects to foundations. It provides examples of open source projects, like Vert.x, that faced governance issues when associated with a single company. It outlines options for governance models like staying independent, forking, or moving to a foundation. Foundations discussed include Software for Public Interest, Software Freedom Conservancy, Outercurve, Apache Software Foundation, and Eclipse Foundation. The document compares services foundations offer around governance, IP management, infrastructure, and community support. It emphasizes that good governance through a vendor-neutral foundation can provide predictability and encourage open collaboration for open source projects.
Why Open Source Governance Matters
- 1. Eclipse Foundation Why Does Open Source Governance Matter? Ian Skerrett Eclipse Foundation 01/05/2013 1
- 2. Eclipse Foundation Open Source Has Won #1 01/05/2013 2
- 4. Eclipse Foundation01/05/2013 4 Source: 2013 Future of Open Source Survey
- 5. Eclipse Foundation01/05/2013 5 Source: 2013 Future of Open Source Survey
- 6. Eclipse Foundation01/05/2013 6 Source: 2013 Future of Open Source Survey
- 7. Eclipse Foundation We Know ‘Most’ of the Following Licensing Usage Policies (Procurement) Business Models
- 8. Eclipse Foundation Open Source Maturity Model 0. Deny 1. Use 2. Contribute 3.Champion 4.Collaborate 5. Redefine Scope Time Value Captured Value co-creation Value capture Business DrivenEngineering Driven 01/05/2013 8
- 10. Eclipse Foundation Good Governance Creates Trust Art Source: lumaxart 01/05/2013 10
- 11. Eclipse Foundation Project Stages: Individual Developer starts project Project becomes successful Questions of control and ownership
- 12. Eclipse Foundation Vert.x Example Dear Vert.x Community, As many of you already know I left VMware at the end of December and started at Red Hat last week. In the spirit of open source and as a commitment to the Vert.x community I had expected (perhaps naively) that VMware would continue to let me continue to administer the Vert.x project after I had left their employment. On the 28th December I received a letter from VMware lawyers (delivered to my door in person, no less!) that I must immediately give up and transfer to VMware all administrative rights over the following things: The Vert.x github project, the Vert.x google group, the domain vertx.io and the Vert.x blog. Source: Tim Fox, Vert.x Google Group
- 13. Eclipse Foundation Project Stages: Corporate Company starts a project Project becomes successful Competitive landscape issues
- 14. Eclipse Foundation Project Stages: Corporate 2 Company starts a project Project becomes successful Company Changes Strategy
- 16. Eclipse Foundation Governance = Who Is In Control IP Ownership Control – Copyright, Trademark, License Development Control – Who controls the code repository – Who makes the decision on project releases and functionality – Platform support
- 17. Eclipse Foundation Governance Questions How are decision made? Who is final authority? What are the business motivations of the final authority?
- 19. Eclipse Foundation Vert.x Options 1) "Netty-style solution". In this solution almost everything continues as-is. The only difference is a CLA is crafted that grants rights of the contributions not to RHT or VMW, but to the "Project". This would require VMWare to grant a perpetual license to the "Project" for use of the name Vert.x. 2) Fork. We wouldn't have permission to use the name 'Vert.x' so we'd have to rename the project. That means removing all references to 'Vert.x' from the code, documentation, and other materials. We'd also lose the current github issues, the wiki, the blog, Google Group and domain. This would not require any permission from VMware. 3) Move project to Apache Software Foundation. This would need approval from ASF and VMware. 4) Move project to the Eclipse Foundation. This would need approval from the Eclipse Foundation and VMware. Tim Fox - Vert.x Google Forum – January 10, 2013 01/05/2013 19
- 20. Eclipse Foundation Governance Options 1. Fork 2. Status quo 3. Create a legal entity for the ‘Project’. - Create a Foundation 4. Move Project to a Foundation
- 22. Eclipse Foundation Status Quo: Individuals Something that isn't a legal entity can't hold copyright. I do see frequently that some Free Software projects have notices say Copyright, The Project". However, if "The Project" isn't a legal entity in some jurisdiction somewhere in the world, that's probably not a valid copyright notice, and I recommend against using it. Bradley Kuhn Vert.x Google Group January 10,2013 01/05/2013 22
- 23. Eclipse Foundation Status Quo: Corporate 01/05/2013 23
- 24. Eclipse Foundation Creating a Foundation 01/05/2013 24
- 25. Eclipse Foundation Goals of Creating a Foundation No special status Long-term stability
- 26. Eclipse Foundation Incorporation • Incorporation – 501.c3 (a charity) – 501.c6 (trade association) • Write Bylaws • Selecting Board of Directors I wanted to keep the project neutral. However, in Korea, it is pretty difficult for an individual to found a non-profit. Trustin Lee, Netty Project Leader Vert.x Google Forum, January 10, 2013
- 27. Eclipse Foundation Agreements • Membership Agreement • Open Source License Selection • Contribution and Committer Agreements • Trademark Guidelines
- 28. Eclipse Foundation Setup • Development Process – How are committers determined – How are technical decision made for the project • IT Infrastructure – What forge will be used? • Financials – What is the budget – Professional staff or volunteers – Funding model: donations, memberships, other?
- 29. Eclipse Foundation Ongoing Operation • Filing taxes • Maintain infrastructure • Fundraising
- 30. Eclipse Foundation Pros and Cons • Pros: Determine your own destiny – Create your own rules to fit your community • Cons: Time and Cost – Legal costs – Time to setup and gain agreement on governance of the project and legal agreements – Difficult in many countries – Ongoing work
- 31. Eclipse Foundation MOVE TO A FOUNDATION 01/05/2013 31
- 32. Eclipse Foundation Types of Foundations Self-service Foundations • Software for the Public Interest (SPI) • Software Freedom Conservatory (SFC) • Outercurve Community of Practice • Apache • Eclipse
- 33. Eclipse Foundation Differences: Services Offered Governance Development processes IP Management rules IT Infrastructure Community development Pooling financial resources
- 34. Eclipse Foundation Charity (501.c3) vs Trade Association (501.c6) “… Mike has noted in his posts that Eclipse focuses on interacting with the for-profit industry, which is what trade associations like Eclipse (and Linux Foundation, too) are for. They do a good job at this task, and if your project's main goal is to interact with for-profit companies, then a trade association solution as a fiscal sponsor is probably right. By contrast, non-profit charities like SPI and Conservancy focus on benefiting the general public. Every time a member project at Conservancy wants to do something, the question I ask is whether the plan helps make the software better (more available, more usable, etc.) for everyone in the general public. It's not that charities *ignore* the for-profit corporate user base, but rather we focus first on the *individuals* who use and develop the software. ”Bradley Kuhn Vert.x Google Group Jan. 10 2013
- 35. Eclipse Foundation Governance of Foundation • Charity vs Trade Association • Stakeholders/Membership (Board membership) • Meritocracy • Independent Advisors / Professional Staff
- 36. Eclipse Foundation IP Management • License selection and compatibility • Copyright aggregation (or not) – CLA • IP due diligence • Committer records • Trademark ownership
- 37. Eclipse Foundation IT Infrastructure IMO, any neutral foundation we go with should provide a) Hosting for git repository, mirrorable to the _current_ project at github. Please no svn, cvs or mercurial b) Hosting for issue tracker. JIRA preferred. Don't like bugzilla. c) Hosting for mailing lists d) Hosted for project web site e) Hosting for downloads f) Hosting for public module repository - in Vert.x 2.0 this is likely to be a Maven repository. g) Ability to use external CI, e.g. CloudBees or Travis h) Can accept pull requests via github Tim Fox Vert.x Google Group January 13, 2013
- 38. Eclipse Foundation Software for Public Interest Services Offered Governance 501.c3 Individual and organizational membership Development Process Project Defined IP Management Rules Project Responsibility IT Infrastructure Project Responsibility Community Development None Pooling Financial Resources Yes, accepts donations on behalf of the project 01/05/2013 38
- 39. Eclipse Foundation Software Freedom Conservatory Services Offered Governance 501.c3 Professional Staff Development Process Project Defined IP Management Rules • Hold assets on project behalf • Contract negotiations • FLOSS copyright enforcement IT Infrastructure Project Responsibility Community Development Conference logistical support Pooling Financial Resources Yes, accepts donations on behalf of the project 01/05/2013 39
- 40. Eclipse Foundation Outercurve Services Offered Governance 501.c6 Corporate membership Professional staff Development Process Provides guidelines and best practices IP Management Rules Contribution and assignment agreements License agnostic Trademark ownership IT Infrastructure Project Responsibility Community Development Events, press support, mentorship Pooling Financial Resources Yes 01/05/2013 40
- 41. Eclipse Foundation Now that I've gone through the whole thing, I see that if one really takes this to the logical conclusion, you'll go the way toward Apache/Eclipse style mechanisms. But then, one shouldn't have to make the whole leap in one go, right? Kohsuke Kawaguchi Source: Vert.x Google Group January 10, 2013 01/05/2013 41
- 42. Eclipse Foundation Apache Software Foundation Services Offered Governance 501.c3 Individual membership Volunteer operated Development Process The Apache Way IP Management Rules • Contribution agreements • Trademarks • Committer Records • Apache license requirements IT Infrastructure Apache hosted forge Community Development • Project Mentors • Conferences Pooling Financial Resources No 01/05/2013 42
- 43. Eclipse Foundation Eclipse Foundation Services Offered Governance 501.c6 Corporate and Individual Members Profession Staff Development Process The Eclipse Way IP Management Rules • IP Scanning • Trademarks • Committer Records • Eclipse license requirements IT Infrastructure Eclipse hosted forge Community Development • Project Mentors • Conferences • Press support • Marketplace Pooling Financial Resources Yes 01/05/2013 43
- 44. Eclipse Foundation Why Does Open Source Governance Matter? Vendor Neutral + Predictability = Open Collaboration 01/05/2013 44
Editor's Notes
- #2: Governance is something often overlooked by open source projects until they become successfulThis presentation is inspired based on a conversation around the governance for the vert.x project
- #3: Open source is everywhere. What IT or software company is not using open source? Open source has changed the industry.
- #4: Gartner was even claiming 50% people using open source. More are looking towards OSS as a competitive advantage.
- #5: Across all the industries
- #6: Recent Black Duck survey confirms open source is taking over. The number of projects is soaring…
- #7: Reasons are interesting too: Innovation and Partnerships
- #8: We have built up a body of knowledge around using open source. We don’t have a lot of conversations about governance.
- #10: Trust = Vendor Neutral + Predictability
- #22: Fork does not solve governance problems