Ettiquette For Restarting Abandoned Open Source Projects?
nicsterrr asks: "What does one do when a promising open source project stops dead with no word from the developer(s)? I have been considering contributing to a certain sorceforge hosted project over the past few months, but unfortunately all development seems to have stopped and the main developer has vanished (from the internet at least). I understand that the GPL states that GPL source code can be used in derived work if the licence is unchanged, but I am hesitant just to 'hijack' the work done by (it seems) just one person, without first having an understanding of what his thoughts are first. In addition, there are almost no supporting comments in the code, and no separate developer documentation. What would you do in this situation if you were interested in furthering the undocumented, unfinished, and currently abandoned work (which at first glance seems to have potential) of someone else, and your attempts to
contact them have been in vain?"
What you're essentially doing is creating a development fork, with the original "tine" not being developed.
I suppose you should take some time and try and contact the original developers, and see if you can get an official go-ahead. But if you can't, go right ahead.
In the worst case, if the original maintainers come back and cause such a stink about your taking over the project, they can take what you produced and merge or develop their own fork.
Just to clear yourself of any liability, write the following letter to the former developer, and post a copy publically on the project page.
Dear [open source guy who abandoned a project]:
I've looked with great interest at [project]. The sourceforge page shows that the project activity is nearly zero, and the last software release was done almost three years ago.
It seems like such a waste to have the project stagnate, so I wanted to take this opportunity to pass along a few comments. Namely, I want to inform you that I will be resuming development of this fantastic application. You've done a fine job, and it will be a great honor to continue in your footsteps. I also have a few other things, I feel you should know.
I don't know how to put this delicately, but: YOU LAZY FUCK, YOUR SHIT IS MY SHIT NOW. It's TOO FUCKING BAD you can't finish a single fucking thing that you started, you ass jockey sloth. NEXT TIME, WHY DON'T YOU MAN THE FUCK UP. Take a little responsiblity for ONCE IN YOUR LIFE YOU WORTHLESS SACK OF PUBES.
LAZY FUCKS like you probably don't even finish taking a shit. WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR FUCKING PROBLEM? YOU DISAPPEAR LIKE SOME FUCKING FBI SUPA DOUBLE TOP SECRET AGENT. You are a failed open source developer. WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU RUNNING FROM? The honest answer, as a failed open source developer, is your fucking shame!
Please feel free to send me any comments or advice. I look forward to hearing from you.
Warm regards,
PMF
Was it really abandoned or did the guy have something happen to him in meatworld? I mean it could be anything, got locked up, got sick, moved to ubangiland, anything. With that said, here's one solution, you can fork it immediately,get to work on it,and if/when the original guy shows back up,contact him and either agree to rejoin efforts-or not.
http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/homesteading/h omesteading
11*43+456^2
It is within your right under tha authors' chosen license that you may modify the source and make it publically available (which it must be :)).
:)
I personally think it's great you're concerned with etiquette, but the author is uncontactable. If he contacts you in the future with concerns about your work, it appears you already have the manners to listen to him, at any time.
Good luck.
I have been in almost exactly the same position you find yourself. Mike Trojnara, who was (and again is) the developer of Stunnel fell off the face of the Internet for a while back in 2000, and there were several problems that I discovered in the code during his absense. The machine running it was no longer under his control, and eventually dissapeared alltogether, so I took all my archives and started creating new versions. To make it obvious I'd taken over, aside from being blatant about it on the mailing list (which was still working) I labeled my versions differently - 3.8p1 instead of 3.9, for example. Eventually Mike found his way back onto the net, and I promptly and happily handed the developer's sword back to him. His next version was build directly from my latest version (though he later removed the 'goto' I put in there just because I could.)
I had always planned on giving it back to him if he wanted it (I wasn't comfortable developing crypto code here in the US at the time - my rights were still very vaguely defined at the time) so in my experience it went off without a hitch, and there was no fork, just a smooth transition from one to the other.
If you want to continue maintaining it, and are releasing it under the GPL (which I assume you must), there's no reason the original author can't fork off yours or maintain his older branch separately.
I'd say make every effort to reach the original author, and if you don't get anywhere, start maintaining it. You have every legal right, and even the moral right when Open Source code stagnates.
silly silly people
post a link to the actual dead project!
--meh--
I once checked with the Free Software Foundation on whether they knew anything about the OS/2 port of EMACS (last check had it at 19.3.x or something really old). As they were unable to contact anybody on that, I was told that I was welcome to do what I would with it, be it build the original code or just let it fester.
That's the really cool thing about GNU - a side effect is that if somebody stops the show for some reason and abandons the project (in this case...well, OS/2, you do the math), you are welcome to pick up whatever pieces were left and run with the torch. Sourceforge even seems to allow for that, with the resources already there.
This sig no verb.
Have you checked it's not in http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org/