Ask Slashdot: Spreading the Word About At-Risk Open Source Projects?

An anonymous reader writes "There is a piece of software, released under the Modified BSD license, that risks becoming abandonware and, IMHO, is worth being saved. Where can I post an announcement to find people than can take care of it?" This seems like a problem that a lot of projects run into; is there a clearinghouse for open-source projects at risk?

Comments

Re:Taking Care of Open Source Software

[0racle]

Can't change the license if you're not the copyright holder.

To the submitter, one way of getting the word out is to actually name and link to the at-risk software in question.

Oh I get it

[Anonymous Coward]

You're trying to find someone who will work for free to maintain a piece of software with dubious usefulness just because you like it.

You got 2 options:

1. Learn to program it and maintain it yourself.
2. Pay someone to do it for you.

Re:Oh I get it

[hedwards]

Most likely, although I do come across projects from time to time that have been abandoned for years that would have been useful if they had made it to critical mass. And those sorts of projects can easily die if they don't attract enough attention early on to handle the lead developer leaving.

Re:Oh I get it

[studog-slashdot]

You're trying to find someone who will work for free to maintain a piece of software with dubious usefulness just because you like it.

You got 2 options:

1. Learn to program it and maintain it yourself.

2. Pay someone to do it for you.

I'll take this opportunity to point out that, if this had been a piece of commercial software where the corporation behind it was gone, your options would be:

1.

2.

This is the power of OSS. You still have options when things don't go the way you'd hoped.

Re:Oh I get it

[dkleinsc]

When I come across a project like that, I ask myself the question "Why did this project not make it to critical mass?" Chances are very good it's one of the following:
1. It really wasn't that useful, just a fairly good idea that turned out to be not worth the effort.
2. It's handled better or at least well enough by a larger more established project.
3. It's targeting a problem that's only a problem to a tiny number of people.

I'm not saying there isn't some project infancy mortality due to failure to publicize, but if it's really that good, either the original developer will want to keep working on it (because it's useful to him), or that developer will be enamored of it enough to show to his / her friend, who finds it useful enough to keep working on it.

And GP is right that if your problem is that there's only a tiny number of people who need the project, and you are a part of that minority, the right thing to do is either take it on yourself or pay somebody to help you out.

what's the name?

[Lunix Nutcase]

So you want to spread the word but won't even give out the name?

Re:what's the name?

[6Yankee]

If the submitter had given the name, the comments would be full of people bitching about slashvertisments.

Re:what's the name?

[Lunix Nutcase]

Yes there are idiots who would do that. So what? If the guy wants help he's going to have to give out the name. I'd be interested but if the guy won't say the name it'll be a bit hard to help them.

Re:Try to get the license changed to GPL

[ysth]

Your high horse doesn't let you do unpaid work, but you are willing to use these projects for which you send bug reports? Don't you feel morally tainted by encouraging other people to do unpaid work like that? How about you consider use of the end result as your payment.

Universities?

[Niris]

Depending on the size of the project you may want to see if any students looking for a graduation project would want to pick it up

Fork it

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, first of all, there's no such thing as "abandonware" in open source. The term is used to describe closed source program in which was offered at one point and then largely forgotten about by its developers and therefore not ported to newer operating systems and/or architectures despite having an active or semi-active user base.

With open source software, the code is always available so anyone who wants to continue maintaining it can always do so. If you, as a user, care enough about the project, and the maintainer seems to have left town, then it's up to you to continue maintaining it and/or fork your own version. If you're not a developer, then hire one. You can't just rally the community and say, "hey there, somebody please support this software for me! It's BSD-licensed so I don't have to pay you!"

Re:Fork it

[jd]

Not true, I'm afraid. VSIPL++ was GPLed for some time by CodeSourcery. When they were bought up by Mentor Graphics, the GPL version ceased to be available. Anywhere. It is not on their site, requests for information reveal only that it was funded by the USAF and that when the funding stopped so did the project.

I know of nobody who possesses a copy of that last GPLed VSIPL++ library. I know of no repository hosting it. I know of no developer attempting to maintain it. There will be binaries out there, since the code was indeed used, but the source? The source appears to no longer exist.

(Yes, the commercial branch of VSIPL++ is still under development but there's no source for it.)

That, in my books, makes the GPL branch of the library every bit as much Abandonware as any other product.

Which repo requires GPL?

[tepples]

The OP's situation involves software under what appears to be a 3-clause BSD license, which is a GPL-compatible free software license. Which repositories require specifically the GPL as opposed to GPL-compatible free software licenses in general?

Not having to maintain your private patch

[tepples]

The reward for contributing your code to a GPL program is not having to maintain your private patch against the program's source code for as long as you use the program.

Social engineering

[Anonymous Coward]

Try sending the project a DMCA Cease and Decist notice, and then post a story in slashdot about some patent troll bullying an open source project.

Then watch as the streisand effect does its magic.

Open Source Software

[Lando]

Generally open source software are scratch projects, ie I have an itch so I scratch it. If something isn't maintained, it either works well enough as it is or isn't used. If you want to keep work going on it and are not a programmer you have 3 real solutions, ie pay to have it worked on, try to interest others in working on it by advertising via websites(slashdot / freshmeat / sourceforge / github /etc), personal emails to people that might want to work on it, or any other means of communication, eg attend a local Lug, etc, the last option of course is to learn how to program and scratch the itch yourself.

The biggest issue is the license the software is released under. If GPL, just fork the code and get to work. If under a more restrictive license your hands are pretty much tied. Proprietary software dies quite frequently, opensource might get mothballed for years and then get pulled back out when someone has an itch to scratch.

Its not about that project - its more general

[FritzSolms]

If the poster had given the name, the focus might have been on how to safe that particular project whilst the question is more general (and more important). What infrastructure has open source got in place to safe abandoned software projects in general?

Where OSS goes to die

[chrish]

Lots and lots of dead/abandoned Open Source projects at sourceforge.net, codeplex.com, etc.

I don't think we need a new service for this, just go look for projects that haven't been updated in 3+ years, you'll find lots of them.

Re:Where OSS goes to die

[jd]

Too late. Uwe Hermann has been running a service since around 2002 for abandoned Open Source software, maybe longer. And, yes, it's been on Slashdot a few times (thank you Google).

Re:Try to get the license changed to GPL

[Silk]

You don't know much about the GPL, do you? You were almost right about one thing: "nobody can take the code private." Only the copyright holder has the right to change the license. Anyone else, however, can make changes to the software, not provide those changes back to the copyright holder AND make money by selling GPL software. Any modifications you make to the software are also licensed under the GPL and you are not required to share the source code with anyone except the people that use your modifications. If you sell object code (binaries) of the software to customers, you are required to provide the source code to your customers upon request. The price you charge for the software is only limited by what your customers are willing to pay and you can't charge anything more for the source code.

It's not difficult. Reading the GNU project's philosophy on selling GPL software might help you better understand how it works. Looking up "selling GPL software" on Google is also an option.

Request a search feature on freshmeat

[sgt scrub]

Send a request to freshmeat.net for a search feature allowing you to search for projects that haven't been updated for a long time.