Why Open Source Governance Matters

Eclipse Foundation2023-04-11 1

Why Does Open Source Governance Matter?

Ian SkerrettEclipse Foundation


Open Source Has Won

#1



Source: 2013 Future of Open Source Survey





Eclipse Foundation

We Know ‘Most’ of the Following

Licensing

Usage Policies

(Procurement)

Business Models


Open Source Maturity Model

0. Deny

1. Use

2. Contribute

3.Champion

4.Collaborate

5. Redefine

Scope

Time

Value Captured

Value co-creationValue capture

Business DrivenEngineering Driven


Collaboration Requires Trust


Good Governance Creates Trust

Art Source: lumaxart

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22177648@N06/2137737248/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22177648@N06/2137737248/

Eclipse Foundation

Project Stages: Individual

Developer starts

project

Project becomes successful

Questions of control and ownership

Eclipse Foundation

Vert.x ExampleDear Vert.x Community,

As many of you already know I left VMware at the end of December and started at Red Hat last week.

In the spirit of open source and as a commitment to the Vert.x community I

had expected (perhaps naively) that VMware would continue to let me continue to administer the Vert.x project after I had left their employment.

On the 28th December I received a letter from VMware lawyers (delivered to my door in person, no less!) that I must immediately give up and transfer to VMware all administrative rights over the following things: The Vert.x github project, the Vert.x google group, the domain vertx.io and the Vert.x blog.

Source: Tim Fox, Vert.x Google Group

http://vertx.io/

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!msg/vertx/gnpGSxX7PzI/uRNaMtJaIJUJ



Eclipse Foundation

Project Stages: Corporate

Company starts a project


Competitive landscape

issues

Eclipse Foundation

Project Stages: Corporate 2

Company starts a project


Company Changes Strategy


Examples

Eclipse Foundation

Governance = Who Is In Control

IP Ownership Control– Copyright, Trademark, License

Development Control– Who controls the code repository– Who makes the decision on project releases and

functionality– Platform support

Eclipse Foundation

Governance Questions

How are decision made?

Who is final authority?

What are the business motivationsof the final authority?


GOVERNANCE SOLUTIONS?


Vert.x Options1) "Netty-style solution". In this solution almost everything continues as-is. The only difference is a CLA is crafted that grants rights of the contributions not to RHT or VMW, but to the "Project". This would require VMWare to grant a perpetual license to the "Project" for use of the name Vert.x.

2) Fork. We wouldn't have permission to use the name 'Vert.x' so we'd have to rename the project. That means removing all references to 'Vert.x' from the code, documentation, and other materials. We'd also lose the current github issues, the wiki, the blog, Google Group and domain. This would not require any permission from VMware.

3) Move project to Apache Software Foundation. This would need approval from ASF and VMware.

4) Move project to the Eclipse Foundation. This would need approval from the Eclipse Foundation and VMware.

Tim Fox - Vert.x Google Forum – January 10, 2013

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/vertx/WIuY5M6RluM

Eclipse Foundation

Governance Options

1. Fork

2. Status quo

3. Create a legal entity for the ‘Project’. - Create a Foundation

4. Move Project to a Foundation


?


Status Quo: Individuals

Something that isn't a legal entity can't hold copyright. I do see frequently that some Free Software projects have notices say Copyright, The Project". However, if "The Project" isn't a legal entity in some jurisdiction somewhere in the world, that's probably not a valid copyright notice, and I recommend against using it.

Bradley KuhnVert.x Google GroupJanuary 10,2013

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/vertx/WIuY5M6RluM%5B51-75-false%5D


Status Quo: Corporate


Creating a Foundation

Eclipse Foundation

Goals of Creating a Foundation

No special status Long-term stability

Eclipse Foundation

Incorporation

• Incorporation– 501.c3 (a charity)– 501.c6 (trade association)

• Write Bylaws• Selecting Board of Directors

I wanted to keep the project neutral. However, in Korea, it is pretty difficult for an individual to found a non-profit.

Trustin Lee, Netty Project Leader Vert.x Google Forum, January 10, 2013

Eclipse Foundation

Agreements

• Membership Agreement • Open Source License Selection• Contribution and Committer Agreements• Trademark Guidelines

Eclipse Foundation

Setup

• Development Process– How are committers determined– How are technical decision made for the project

• IT Infrastructure– What forge will be used?

• Financials– What is the budget– Professional staff or volunteers– Funding model: donations, memberships, other?

Eclipse Foundation

Ongoing Operation

• Filing taxes• Maintain infrastructure• Fundraising

Eclipse Foundation

Pros and Cons• Pros: Determine your own destiny

– Create your own rules to fit your community

• Cons: Time and Cost– Legal costs– Time to setup and gain agreement on governance

of the project and legal agreements– Difficult in many countries– Ongoing work


MOVE TO A FOUNDATION

Eclipse Foundation

Types of Foundations

Self-service Foundations• Software for the

Public Interest (SPI)• Software Freedom

Conservatory (SFC)• Outercurve

Community of Practice• Apache• Eclipse

Eclipse Foundation

Differences: Services Offered

Governance

Development processes

IP Management rules

IT Infrastructure

Community development

Pooling financial resources

Eclipse Foundation

Charity (501.c3) vs Trade Association (501.c6)“… Mike has noted in his posts that Eclipse focuses on interacting

with the for-profit industry, which is what trade associations like Eclipse (and Linux Foundation, too) are for. They do a good job at

this task, and if your project's main goal is to interact with for-profit companies, then a trade association solution as a fiscal sponsor is probably right.

By contrast, non-profit charities like SPI and Conservancy focus on benefiting the general public. Every time a member project at Conservancy wants to do something, the question I ask is whether the plan helps make the software better (more available,

more usable, etc.) for everyone in the general public. It's not that charities *ignore* the for-profit corporate user base, but rather we focus first on the *individuals* who use and develop the software. ” Bradley Kuhn

Vert.x Google GroupJan. 10 2013


Eclipse Foundation

Governance of Foundation

• Charity vs Trade Association• Stakeholders/Membership (Board membership)• Meritocracy• Independent Advisors / Professional Staff

Eclipse Foundation

IP Management

• License selection and compatibility• Copyright aggregation (or not)

– CLA• IP due diligence• Committer records• Trademark ownership

Eclipse Foundation

IT InfrastructureIMO, any neutral foundation we go with should provide

a) Hosting for git repository, mirrorable to the _current_ project at github. Please no svn, cvs or mercurialb) Hosting for issue tracker. JIRA preferred. Don't like bugzilla.c) Hosting for mailing lists d) Hosted for project web sitee) Hosting for downloadsf) Hosting for public module repository - in Vert.x 2.0 this is likely to be a Maven repository.g) Ability to use external CI, e.g. CloudBees or Travish) Can accept pull requests via github

Tim FoxVert.x Google GroupJanuary 13, 2013


Software for Public Interest

Services Offered

Governance 501.c3Individual and organizational membership

Development Process Project Defined

IP Management Rules Project Responsibility

IT Infrastructure Project Responsibility

Community Development None

Pooling Financial Resources Yes, accepts donations on behalf of the project


Software Freedom Conservatory

Services OfferedGovernance 501.c3

Professional StaffDevelopment Process Project Defined

IP Management Rules • Hold assets on project behalf• Contract negotiations• FLOSS copyright enforcement


Community Development Conference logistical support

Pooling Financial Resources Yes, accepts donations on behalf of the project


OutercurveServices Offered

Governance 501.c6Corporate membershipProfessional staff

Development Process Provides guidelines and best practices

IP Management Rules Contribution and assignment agreementsLicense agnosticTrademark ownership


Community Development Events, press support, mentorship

Pooling Financial Resources Yes


Now that I've gone through the whole thing, I see that if one really takes this to the logical conclusion, you'll go the way toward Apache/Eclipse style mechanisms. But then, one shouldn't have to make the whole leap in one go, right?

Kohsuke KawaguchiSource: Vert.x Google GroupJanuary 10, 2013



Apache Software Foundation

Services OfferedGovernance 501.c3

Individual membershipVolunteer operated

Development Process The Apache Way

IP Management Rules • Contribution agreements • Trademarks• Committer Records• Apache license requirements

IT Infrastructure Apache hosted forge

Community Development • Project Mentors• Conferences

Pooling Financial Resources No


Eclipse FoundationServices Offered

Governance 501.c6Corporate and Individual MembersProfession Staff

Development Process The Eclipse Way

IP Management Rules • IP Scanning• Trademarks• Committer Records• Eclipse license requirements

IT Infrastructure Eclipse hosted forge

Community Development • Project Mentors• Conferences• Press support• Marketplace

Pooling Financial Resources Yes


Why Does Open Source Governance Matter?

Vendor Neutral+

Predictability=

Open Collaboration


Questions

[email protected]: @ianskerrett

mailto:[email protected]

Technology

Why Open Source Governance Matters