Open Source Openness

Nathan Willis has an excellent article up on linux.com—When open source projects close the process, something’s wrong. I couldn’t agree more.

Willis provides us with two examples of open source teams failing to appreciate the philosophy of openness and inclusion on which the licenses are based. Luckily, we have the freedom to fork. So when a community misbehaves and tries to close the gates, the rest of us are not left out in the cold.

How do you stop a fork? Well, that’s just the point. You can’t. But you can discourage a fork by being inclusive. Cathedral-style closed communities only increase the likelihood of forks. When contribution is open to anyone, then people tend to want to work together. When you limit or close contribution, the pressure builds up and only a fork can offer release.

A warning sign is when more contributions are rejected than accepted. While wikipedia hasn’t gotten to that point, the current battle between deletionist versus inclusionists is troubling and a sign that many within the wikipedia community don’t fully accept the implications of free culture. Perhaps the deletionists will be successful in keeping their precious wiki-garden free from unwanted “weeds,” but that will only encourage others to compete instead of collaborate.

Back in 2004, I ranted about the fear of forking and duplication in open source circles. Truly open and inclusive projects do not fear forks. They don’t fear “unauthorized” usage. They don’t close the door on volunteer contributions. Trying to maintain control by limiting contributions only has the opposite effect. As Princess Leia put it “The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more [code] will slip through your fingers.“