Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open Source Studies

Posted by michael on from the hitting-the-books dept.

e8johan writes "Avaya Labs Research has presented a paper studying the open source process in the cases of Apache and Mozilla. They reach a number of interesting conclusions, the ones I find most interesting are: * Open source projects tend to have a core team of 10-15 coders, producing almost all code. The next layer is a set of developers submitting new features and bugfixes. The next layer is a set of advanced users submitting bug reports. * Open source projects tend to have a lower bug-rate than commercial projects. * Open source projects are generally quicker to respond to user requests. The article also discusses the differences between projects that have always been open source (such as Apache) and projects having a proprietary history (such as Mozilla)."

6 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. Open Source = Communism by eamber · · Score: -1, Troll

    Open Source has been deployed to control the masses. Anyone who uses an open source application is opening themselves to backdoors, bugs, and piracy. Open source leads to teen pregnancy, homosexuality, and herpes.

  2. Open source projects tend to have a lower bug-rate by vlad_petric · · Score: 3, Troll
    I quite agree for Apache, but Mozilla ?? Let's stay in the realm of reason.

    The Raven

    --

    The Raven

  3. Re:LEARN TO SPELL YOU FUCKING WORTHLESS TWAT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    From WordNet (r) 1.7 [wn]:

    cubical
    adj : shaped like a cube [syn: {cubelike}, {cube-shaped}, {cubiform},
    {cuboid}, {cuboidal}]

    Stupid fuckwit.

  4. So what can MS do to respond? by pubjames · · Score: 1, Troll


    I am sure MS must be coming to the conclusion that an open development model is better. And they are masters of strategy. So what can there response to this be?

    The things that Ballamer has said about their Shared-source initiative have been pretty dumb (that it proves that people don't want to see the source code, stuff like that), so it seems that at the top level they still don't get it. But they will. So what can they do? Obviously they can't GPL their stuff but is it possible for them to start using a more open development model and still maintain the leverage they currently have?

    Personally I hope not. When it comes to developers developers developers, the OSS development model is currently winning and it's going to be difficult for MS to change that.

  5. Goatse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Goatse!!!

  6. If you've ever really used MS Windows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Who actually needs TOTAL control over the OS? What is it about MS Windows or OSX that is stopping you from doing what you want? They both seem pretty complete from where I'm sitting.

    As a PC/Mac developer I usually give bonus points to the OS when it assumes control over something I don't want to have to deal with-- like providing a standard open file dialog for example, or giving me a standard interface to a multimedia device.

    If you think that MS is actually restrictive, go check out their developer documentation, all 2+ gigs of it, and tell me what they forgot to include.