1	OPEN SOURCE: High Risk or High Yield? Scott E. Siddall Denison University
2	What is open source? “When programmers can read, redistribute, and modify the source code for a piece of software, the software evolves. People improve it, people adapt it, people fix bugs. And this can happen at a speed that, if one is used to the slow pace of conventional software development, seems astonishing.” The Open Source Initiative http://opensource.org The open source manifesto The Cathedral and the Bazaar Eric S. Raymond, 1997
3	The Cathedral and the Bazaar Every good work of software starts by scratching a developer's personal itch. Good programmers know what to write. Great ones know what to rewrite (and reuse). When you lose interest in a program, your last duty to it is to hand it off to a competent successor. Treating your users as co-developers is your least-hassle route to rapid code improvement and effective debugging. Release early. Release often. And listen to your customers. Given a large enough beta-tester and co-developer base, almost every problem will be characterized quickly and the fix obvious to someone. The next best thing to having good ideas is recognizing good ideas from your users. Sometimes the latter is better. - Eric S. Raymond
4	The Culture of Open Source Complex software development By loosely coordinated developers and contributors In an informal meritocracy software specifications are rarely written continuous design instead virtual project management a gentle hierarchy
5	Research on open source development “Free and open-source software development is faster, better and cheaper in building a community and at reinforcing and institutionalizing a culture for how to develop software” Walt Scacchi (2004) Institute for Software Research UC Irvine
6	Microsoft’s opinion? The “Halloween” Documents of 1998 “…the intrinsic parallelism and free idea exchange in OSS has benefits that are not replicable with our current licensing model…” “..commercial quality can be achieved / exceeded by OSS projects.” “…OSS is long-term credible…” “…OSS advocates are making a progressively more credible argument that OSS software is at least as robust -- if not more -- than commercial alternatives.” “The ability of the OSS process to collect and harness the collective IQ of thousands of individuals across the Internet is simply amazing.”
7	The word is out
8	Your business officer is being encouraged…
9	Types of open source software Desktop operating systems Linux, Sun Java Desktop Web applications Portals, course management, digital asset management, collaboration and communication tools Central services and infrastructure Email systems, servers, network management tools All could be “mission critical”
10	One campus’ open source email system Linux on redundant, commodity x86 servers Postfix Amavisd-new Cyrus IMAP SpamAssassin
11	Characteristics of open source Transparency of process Community Innovation based on needs and adaptation Open standards Casey Green’s Four C’s of open source: Code – do it better Control – retain it Cash – save it Community – do it together
12	The Assertions Open source software (OSS) costs less than proprietary software Lower licensing cost – yes Lower total cost – perhaps as cost allocations are shifted
13	The Assertions Build your own? Bear all the development costs Provide all your own support Buy? Share development costs with others, plus a vendor profit Pay for support from vendor Borrow (open source)? No licensing costs, or share the costs Provide your own support, buy it, get it from the community
14	The Assertions OSS license management is easy OSS is more reliable and has fewer bugs Depends on transparency of development, number and commitment of developers, parallel debugging, etc Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow (Linus Torvalds) But how can Internet connectivity and asynchronous development work more efficiently if the mythical man month is true? (Adding more programmers to a late project makes it later)
15	The Assertions OSS is more secure and network-ready Usually it is: e.g., defensively designed Linux Users don't have open access to code elements needed to spread malware Proprietary software can be as secure, but fewer developers means fewer reviews OSS can be customized OSS is better because it's transparent OSS is better because it uses open standards So can proprietary software OSS is by and for a community Experimenting with OSS is expensive Not meeting your goals is more expensive
16	The Assertions What is the motivation for creating OSS? Problem solving Altruism Ego Versus economic motivation for proprietary software Community source developers are in close contact with users Some proprietary developers listen to their users as well Some applications aren't compatible with open source True – we need more open standards Proprietary software has more features Proprietary software has better user interfaces, documentation
17	The Assertions Some needs cannot be met with OSS Proprietary software comes with better support than OSS OSS can be difficult to install, distribute, migrate to OSS avoids vendor lock-in OSS projects reuse software elements efficiently Proprietary software developers have better resources Is their commitment to the software, the company, their salary? Students and faculty are more familiar and comfortable with proprietary software
18	That was the theoretical part… What about the practical?
19	Selection, Selection, Selection A very high percentage of open source project fail Those that reach a threshold of development and use are priceless Know your source!
20	Licensing Open Source Initiative 55 licensing models GNU Public License (GPL) applies to 40,000 projects at Sourceforge GPL, BSD, Mozilla, MIT are all popular
21
22	High Risk
23	High Risk
24	High Risk
25	High Risk
26	Lower Risk
27	Lower Risk
28	High Yield
29	Higher Education OS projects Why? Learning and research are our core competencies, our products – this is strategic! IHE are centers of research in software development A diverse, capable and open community: doctoral/research, masters, baccalaureate, associates Why not? The challenges of collaboration
30	Community Source Purposeful coordination of work within a community Based on the principles of open source development A greater reliance on Defined roles Responsibilities Funded commitments “People think just because it is open-source, the result is going to be automatically better. Not true. You have to lead it in the right directions to succeed.” - Linus Torvalds
31	Potentially High Yield
32	Sakai Project Core Institutions Michigan, Indiana, MIT, Stanford, JA-SIG, OKI Sakai Educational Partners Program 44 institutions making financial commitments Mellon and Hewlett funding
33	Mellon Foundation Projects Sakai and Samigo Open Knowledge Initiative uPortal Westwood/Chandler DSpace Fedora ePortfolio LionShare Pubcookie PKI OpenCourseWare (OCW) Visual Understanding Environment (VUE) TK4 (multimedia authoring tool)
34	and open source June 2004 Open Source Summit The Issues Risk management Consolidation among commercial vendors; products discontinued Cost containment Commercial software is expensive; Quality of software Not customizable to our needs Speed of development and customization Compliance with vendor schedules The needs A primer on open source in higher education For executive administration as well as IT management A better understanding of models of collaboration It’s costly and IHE may not be great at it Better licensing models For-profit partners to support open source applications Criteria for evaluating open source software
35	and open source Possible action plans Develop and promote licensing schemes of use to IHE Educate the higher education community about open source Catalog and assess open source applications Help IHE adapt to new software models Foster new models of support for open source Track policies that may impact open source adoption
36	So…high risk or high yield? It depends
37	Practical recommendations Examine the entire cost Licensing, hardware, support, training, documentation, migration from legacy tools Ask why you are considering any application Are learning outcomes the driver? Pilot the software Directly involve all stakeholders; consider outsourcing the pilot Start with “low hanging fruit” – not mission critical applications Understand and plan for support needs Spend avoided licensing costs on local staff development Keep looking – new opportunities arise each week
38	Consortial piloting in Ohio
39	“Production Piloting” Fully engage faculty and students as well as technical staff in evaluations Co-source (partner with a support entity) then focus on learning and teaching Collaborate: minimize the reinvention of wheels
40	“Production Piloting”
41	Resources - Articles "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" by Eric S. Raymond, 1997. “A Second Look at the Cathedral and Bazaar” by Nikolai Bezroukov, 1999. In First Monday. Altruistic individuals, selfish firms? The structure of motivation in Open Source software in First Monday by Andrea Bonaccorsi and Cristina Rossi “Open Source 2007: How did this happen?” by Brad Wheeler “Open Source CMS Pilots” by Scott Siddall. March, 2004. “Socio-technical interaction networks” by Walt Scacchi, 2004. “Using Open Source for Strategic Advantage” by Alfred Essa (EDUCAUSE Live! Session, April 2004) “Update on Westwood and Chandler for Higher Ed” by Scott Siddall. An Open Mind on Open Source by Karla Hignite. In NACUBO’s Business Officer magazine, August 2004. Open Source under the microscope by Paul Festa, 2004. C/NET News. Universities Offer Homegrown Course Software by Jeffrey Young, July 23, 2004. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
42	Resources – Web sites Technical glossary related to open source Sourceforge - “the" open source software development site listing more than 80,000 open source projects The Open Source Initiative – promotes the definition of open source Open source research at the Institute for Software Research, UC Irvine EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research research bulletin, “Aligning IT Strategy to Open Source, Partnering and Web Services.” Nov. 2003.