SourceXchange: Open Source development marketplace
fredzo writes "Brian Behlendorf and O'Reilly have started a site, sourceXchange, where developers can register for development projects. While it's open-source software the developer bids for the job and is paid for the work. Paying jobs start in June. HP is the first sponsor. " Haven't met Tim yet, but Brian rocks. Good work, guys.
Got to get up earrrrrlly in the morning to beat slashdot.
u rcexchange/index.html
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/1999/05/14/so
Editor, Salon Business & Technology
Salon.com
How is this different from The Free Software Bazaar ? I mean, aside from the pretty graphics :-)
After 7 years experience developing apps in C/C++ for M$ platforms,
I've learn to hate M$ and all the bullshit that goes along with
developing on their platforms.
I'm a Linux newbie, and would like to get some experience in
developing Open Source code, and wouldn't mind getting paid for it.
What should I do to get involved in this? I haven't written any Open
Source code yet, but I'm not a shabby C/C++ programmer with reasonably
good OO design skills.
"Do I watch Seinfeld? My life is a Jewish joke!"
Do I watch Seinfeld? My life is a Jewish joke!
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
1) Write some code.
2) GPL it.
I find step 1 to be the hardest--not because writing code is all that hard but because finding projects can be difficult. That's why I love the idea of the sourceXchange (althought I hate BiCapitaLization).
Does this mean I can write off the purchase of a new computer?
BigKahuna
The SourceXchange and the Free Software Bazaar have the similarity that both involve the commissioning of works of software. There might be some call to ask if "Open Source" is the same thing as "Free Software," although that's not too crucial.
There are, however, enough differences as to consider them both potentially viable in their own "corners."
- The Free Software Bazaar is nothing if not informal.
- In contrast, what SourceXchange offers is a fairly formal system for arranging "commissioned works."
As a result, I would not regard these "commissioning bodies" as actually competing with one another.You can pick your license, and there's no one to ask permission of to participate.
This means that participation is cheap and easy for both "commissioners" and developers.
Unfortunately, the informality may not sit well with Pointy Haired Managers. Big, complex projects probably need not apply.
If an organization wants something fairly big, involving substantial effort and cost, this formality is quite necessary.
Unfortunately, the formality will tend to restrict participation to those with fairly "deep pockets."
I expect that someone that wants to sponsor someone to hack their favorite elisp script to work with both Xemacs and GNU Emacs will find the bureaucracy prohibitive
Indeed, it is at least as possible that they could "feed" one another. Jobs "too big" for the informality of the FSB could be directed to "SX," and jobs "too small" for "SX" could be directed to the FSB.