Slashdot Mirror
Former MS Employees Explore OSS
Roberto Andressi writes "A few former Microsoft employees have launched a Web site that evaluates open-source projects. The site is intended as a way for first-time OSS users to 'get their feet wet' before diving into the large community of open source projects out there. The site, Ohloh, will provide background information on a prospective project. The folks behind the site even plan to include a lexicon of terms for very new users. " From the article: "'We collect from the infrastructure the open-source community uses to develop the software,' Ohloh co-founder and CEO Scott Collison told CNET News.com. 'It also serves as an open-source directory. You can find open-source projects and compare them, and gradually find one that's right for you.' The site could appeal to developers who are frustrated by the number of open-source projects that lack clear explanations. Ohloh also seeks to help developers make a build vs. buy decision by offering code analysis, said Collison, who along with co-founder Jason Allen, previously worked at Microsoft."
I'm having a hard time with this. I get the feeling this is a case of "If we (i.e., M$ employees) build it, they will come." Since ohloh has been slashdotted, I cannot tell if this is just a freshmeat knockoff (with a little sourceforge and krugle thrown in).
The site is intended as a way for first-time OSS users to 'get their feet wet' before diving into the large community of open source projects out there.
I got as far the frontpage (hehe), and I think newbies will be afraid to stick their feet in much less dive-in.
Sorry, but I may not be seeing clearly through these suspicious eyes of mine. If so, my apologies to the ohloh folks. Also, welcome and aloha.
That is interesting. But what I'd really like to know is how they determined the time. I've never seen an OSS project which publishes how many hours of work when into writing it. It must be pure speculation. Since they're targeting the OSS illiterate too many people are going to believe these made-up numbers.
Developers: We can use your help.
I think that the most interesting piece of the story has been missed. Ohloh is looking to create a paid service that will assess proprietary software for organizations. Combined with their open-source project DB, I see them building a set of tools that would enable IT managers to assess the relative costs & risks of different solutions far more easily. I would be looking for two developments to make this a reality. First, Ohloh would need to create an estimator of risk for each project based on the available data (a 'risk score'). Second, they would need a way to estimate the cost of customizing existing solutions (open-source & commercial). If they get both of these, they could provide a standardized, risk-adjusted measure of the opportunity cost associated with each development/deployment option. Really hope they are heading this way.
That's not really true. I use sourceforge a lot, for instance, and use their search. That narrows it down a bit, but then you want to make sure the software is right for you. The little synopsis doesn't provide enough detail. So I go to the project's home page, and I'm at a loss to tell you what the program actually does or what platforms it runs on; all I know is it has something to do with the something that I was looking for. Sure, sourceforge can narrow it down some, but it's not always accurate - and it doesn't really let you know that the Windows version differs from the Linux version which differs from the MacOS version...
Sure, you can usually find out what you need to know if you do enough digging, but the home page of a project, I'd think, should be almost like a brochure. If people are really involved with the project and don't want or need to see that sort of thing, they can link directly to the nightly builds or release notes or something. I just don't think the home page of a project should be the release notes.
I know a lot of open source programmers have a "take it or leave it mentality", because they've done it for free on their own time and to their own specifications... and that's fine, but you'd think they'd want to give potential new users an idea of whether or not the application fills their need. Even though you don't cry if someone decides not to use your work, it's still better to have more users than few users if you want your project to have any relevence in the long run... after all, if you've worked that hard on a project and release it for free for everyone to use, it's usually because you want other people to use it.
Stupid sexy Flanders.