Perspectives on Code Forking and Sustainability in Open Source Software

  • Linus Nyman
  • Tommi Mikkonen
  • Juho Lindman
  • Martin Fougère
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 378)

Abstract

The ability to create high-quality software artifacts that are usable over time is one of the essential requirements of the software business. In such a setting, open source software offers excellent opportunities for sustainability. In particular, safeguarding mechanisms against planned obsolescence by any single actor are built into the definition of open source. The most powerful of these mechanisms is the ability to fork the project. In this paper we argue that the possibility to fork serves as the invisible hand of sustainability that ensures that code remains open and that the code that best serves the community lives on. Furthermore, the mere option to fork provides a mechanism for safeguarding against despotic decisions by the project lead, who is thus guided in their actions to consider the best interest of the community.

References

  1. 1.
    Murugesan: Harnessing Green IT: Principles and Practices. IT Professional 10(1), 24–33 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Connelly: Mapping Sustainable Development as a Contested Concept. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability 12(3), 259–278 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Davison: Technology and the contested meanings of sustainability. State University of New York Press, Albany (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McManus: Contested terrains: Politics, stories and discourses of sustainability. Environmental Politics 5(1), 48–73 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Planned obsolescence, The Economist (March 23, 2009), http://www.economist.com/node/13354332 (accessed September 14, 2011)
  6. 6.
    Brooks Stevens biography, http://www.brooksstevenshistory.com/brooks_bio.pdf (accessed September 14, 2011)
  7. 7.
    Fishman, Gandal, Shy: Planned Obsolescence as an Engine of Technological Progress. Journal of Industrial Economics 41(4), 361–370 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guiltinan: Creative Destruction and Destructive Creations: Environmental Ethics and Planned Obsolescence. Journal of Business Ethics 89, 19–28 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kallinikos, Aaltonen, Attila: A theory of digital objects. First Monday 15(6-7) (June 2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brooks: The mythical man-month. Addison-Wesley, Boston (1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shapiro, Varian: Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fitzgerald: The Transformation of Open Source Software. MIS Quarterly 30(3), 587–598 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smith: The Wealth of Nations (Bantam Classic Edition March/2003). Bantam Dell, New York (1776)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Raymond: The Cathedral & the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary. O’Reilly, Sebastopol (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fogel: Producing Open Source Software. O’Reilly, Sebastopol (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lehman: Programs, Life Cycles, and Laws of Software Evolution. Proc. IEEE 68(9), 1060–1076 (1980), http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~a78khan/cs446/additional-material/scribe/27-refactoring/Lehman-LawsofSoftwareEvolution.pdf CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nyman, L., Mikkonen, T.: To Fork or Not to Fork: Fork Motivations in SourceForge Projects. In: Hissam, S.A., Russo, B., de Mendonça Neto, M.G., Kon, F. (eds.) OSS 2011. IFIP AICT, vol. 365, pp. 259–268. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Haefliger, von Krogh, Spaeth: Code Reuse in Open Source Software. Management Science 54(1), 180–193 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Darwin: The Origin of Species (1985 Penguin Classics edition). Penguin Books, London (1859)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Christensen: The Innovator’s Dilemma. Collins, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meeker: The Open Source Alternative: Understanding Risks and Leveraging Opportunities. Wiley, Hoboken (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sinclair: License Profile: BSD. International Free and Open Source Software Law Review 2(1) (2010), doi:10.5033/ifosslr.v2i1.28Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lindman, Rossi, Puustelli: Matching Open Source Software Licenses with Corresponding Business Models. IEEE Software 28(4), 31–35 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hammouda, Mikkonen, Oksanen, Jaaksi: Open Source Legality Patterns: Architectural Design Decisions Motivated by Legal Concerns. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linus Nyman
    • 1
  • Tommi Mikkonen
    • 2
  • Juho Lindman
    • 1
  • Martin Fougère
    • 1
  1. 1.Hanken School of EconomicsHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Tampere University of TechnologyTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations