Disagreeing with TUAW and the new ‘OSS manifesto’
I read a link on TUAW to a post by a Handbrake developer about his view of what open source development is and isn’t. My shorthand response: never attempt to speak for an entire movement, it tends to come back quickly.
Disclaimer: By and large I agree with TUAW’s framing of the topic and do not hold them at fault, and my apologies for the title inferring this.
I try not to use caps as it’s annoying but, I COMPLETELY DISAGREE WITH THIS! I’ve worked on a number of notable projects (as a developer on Adium for over four years, and as developer and now lead on Growl for at least two or three) and can’t agree whatsoever with the tone and content of the post.
The author comes across as if they are doing the world a favor, and on some level they are (code doesn’t tend to write itself.) But at some point you transcend yourself and recognize that the community itself is the larger goal - you are but a cog driving a mechanism. Let me explain something to rhester (and really any OSS developer) - you can be replaced. The community is what drives the failure or success of a project. The community is what pulls new developers in and extends the desire to work on things. Perhaps you’ve not reached the point where the community dramatically overarches the size of yourself (or ego, seemingly), but it shall come (trust me, after the first 500,000 or so it becomes a bit easier.)
All in all, I shook my head during the whole post. If you have to state that you aren’t being condescending it’s quite likely you are. Beyond that I take serious umbrage with his desire to speak for all of open source. On behalf of myself and Growl, I disagree. On behalf of Adium, I do as well. We are driven by our communities and quite passionate and supportive of them (as is Subversion, and Karl Fogel wrote a great book, “Producing OSS”, that illustrates all of what rhester has completely missed about OSS.) It’s too bad Handbrake isn’t the same and I’ll be sure to avoid such a project.
Some additional notes as I discussed this with a friend:
A fundamental point rhester misses in his post is that programmers do not represent users (unless it is a developer tool), they [programmers] are a different breed and you should take this into account when working.
Another aspect that I alluded to was replaceability - what I mean here is that no one person can say they are the OSS project or it’s future because in four years the entire codebase could end up rewritten and by new developers to boot (especially if you foster a great community!)
This entry was posted
on Saturday, March 24th, 2007 at 1:18 pm and is filed under Musings, Programming.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Save or share this entry: 
| 
March 25th, 2007 at 3:48 am
[…] Original post by Brian […]
March 29th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
[…] Brian Ganninger of Growl and Adium fame has posted on his strong disagreement with the HandBrake […]
April 6th, 2007 at 9:37 pm
It would seem that you don’t speak for Adium developers, either:
http://forums.cocoaforge.com/viewtopic.php?t=6656
Rodney
April 7th, 2007 at 10:03 am
Really? Because I could have swore the project manager and lead developer chimed in on that thread you linked and agreed. Perhaps you should read all the entries, including the ones where community members agree with my points.
April 7th, 2007 at 9:52 pm
Brian,
I think you’re missing the irony here.
Your own words:
=====
B) Last I checked, we wrote and designed the software and it’s our right to make the determinations of what goes in.
C) We’ve detailed a full plugin API and continue to do so, as well as encourage and help plugin authors as much as possible. We (the Adium development team) aren’t likely to take our time on such a project, and it will not be in the release, as indicated. That said, it’s not we are actively stopping someone from doing so, just not us. It’s open source, have a party Smile
…
That’s fine, I recognize others don’t have my gifts - that’s why I volunteer them. That does not, however, give anyone (leads and managers excepting) the right to determine how I employ that donated time.
=====
It is quite interesting how much your words echo the ones I wrote in my so-called ‘manifesto’. In fact, we essentially said the same thing, though there was no accusation of “religious zealotry” in the HandBrake thread.
I won’t be responding again, but you’re welcome to continue to reply if you like. If you choose not to see the duplicity in your harangue above, I don’t really have the time or interest to help you with it - but I’m at least glad to see I don’t stand alone. We are far more alike than you may wish to admit.
Rodney
April 7th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
Rodney,
Thank you for demonstrating your closed-mindedness by removing yourself from the discussion once you feel you’ve proven your point and have the ‘high’ ground. I’ll take a page from that book myself and not waste the time replying to the ‘content’ of your post.
April 7th, 2007 at 11:01 pm
Rodney,
I find it fascinating that you constantly close yourself off from public discussion. You closed comments on your manifesto shortly after you posted it (despite saying you wanted to leave the topic open, and hopefully realizing it was inflammatory) and now that I’ve debated you in public you post your ‘authoritative’ answer and withdraw again. That illustrates my point.
October 5th, 2007 at 10:41 am
[…] Brian Ganninger of Growl and Adium fame has posted on his strong disagreement with the HandBrake […]
April 30th, 2008 at 5:59 am
[…] can see here many disagreeing on that, but I believe there is no doubt that any author can choose his/her community, choosing not to have […]