Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: What Defines Success In an Open Source Project?
rbowen writes "Nine years ago, Slashdot readers discussed what makes an Open Source project successful. The answers were varied, of course. An academic paper summarized the results, agreeing (albeit with more precision) that motivations for Open Source projects are varied. Has anything changed since then? In the era of mobile apps, social media, and Google Ad revenue, have the definitions of Open Source project success changed at all? Have your reasons changed for being involved in Open Source?"
Your project is a success when a corporation embeds it in their product and violates the GPL.
I think widespread usage is a good metric and not just gloating over profit like the Apple fans like to do. "Apple derived the most profit from the cell phone industry." they say, to put down Android's usage gains. By that metric, IIS is totally killing Apache and Nginx in the web server space, but most folks consider Apache beats IIS. Which of this is true?
This space for rent.
If RMS takes credit for the project and insists that everyone put "GNU/" in front of the name.
If so, you're not done yet. If not, find another itch to scratch.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
On a personal level, your open-source project is successful when it accomplishes everything you set out to do with it. On a non-personal level, widespread usage is probably the best metric.
My blog
When respected authorities begin to compare you directly to the commercial alternative, even if you're still found somewhat wanting, you have arrived.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
I believe RMS said it best when he declared the following metrics required for FOSS project success:
1) To crush your enemies
2) To see them driven before you
3) To hear the lamentation of their women
For a good example of this, check out how Android has dominated Window Phone 7 and how their womenfolk continually spam Slashdot with first posts about their crushed dreams.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
1. Did it solve the original problem it was intended to solve?
2. How many other people had their problem solved by it? (usage stats, as much as possible)
3. How many other people were motivated to improve it? (got involved as developers, testers, documenters, etc)
4. Did it reach a point where it was so darned useful and bug-free that nobody really needed to think seriously about the problem ever again? (e.g. GNU's "bc" utility, which hasn't changed since 2000, and does its job beautifully)
The ultimately successful open source project goes through a lifecycle of something like:
1. solve an immediate problem
2. get developers, testers, documenters involved solving the problem in a wider context
3. solve the problem for a whole lot of users
4. nobody thinks any more work is needed
I am officially gone from
When a project evolves into that state where developers and users get along an coexist peacefully, then you have an environment that benefits both groups. It seems like a simple social skill, but actually this is rather rare. I have been in a couple of projects, one where the users and developers have something of an acid relationship and have a confrontational nature. Little gets done, and nobody is happy. But in the other one, users, developers, and other contributors (I18N, addons, builds, examples, etc) all get along harmoniously and produce a wonderful product. The producer/consumer model does not work in open source projects. Mutual respect and courtesy are the key to getting the job done. This also includes upstream library developers, distro managers, etc.
The exact same thing that defines success in non-open source software: It does what you wanted.
Doesn't matter whether it's a log rotation script, a web app, a POS system or firmware for electronics on the next spaceship. Software success is determined by only one metric. Open source doesn't enter into it.
You might not like Mickie-D's fair but nobody in their right mind wouldn't call them successful. That's what we're talking about here.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
I'd say, when your open-source project is better because you made it open-source, it's successful. My own minor projects have been improved by testing, bug reports, bug fixes, and new feature contributions through the years. Certainly they are more useful to me now than they would have been if I was the only one working on them.
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
Success is when you have reached the goal you have set, nothing more, nothing less.
An open-source project can be success even if it has NO users whatsoever outside the developers, and equally well it can be a failure even if it had 200,000 users. An outsider cannot really say whether a project is a success or not, it's the developers who has that say.
Because Redhat makes no money from their nearly $1,000,000,000 in revenue per year and you can't pay them to support their OSS projects.
You know you've arrived when you've been sued for patent infringement.
Never shake hands with a man you meet in a fertility clinic.
...and what a wasteland of failure lies before us... :)
I would say under that metric there is Linux, Firefox, VLC, Bsnes, Dolphin (Wii Emu), Pidgin, SumatraPDF, Filezilla, Blender.... The rest of the FOSS world has some way to go.
I'd say there are a few that are getting close: Gimp, Ardour, Libre Office, OpenShot.....
The bummer is how many FOSS games are just not good enough. It's the year 2012, and there's STILL not a better FOSS Civ 2 than the original Civ 2. Almost all of the best emulators are FOSS though, so.....
Also disappointing is the audio apps. Winamp 2.81 is still the best on Windows. Audacious is good on Linux, but there's no Windows version, so.....
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
you know exactly how popular it is based on how many licenses have sold.
In related news, gonorrhea judged a favorite based on penicillin sales.
Have gnu, will travel.