andrew@dunslane.net writes:
> > There seems to be a lack of recognition here of how free software
> > development works. When people are contributing their time scratching an
> > itch for their own edification the LAST thing they want is to have a
> > manager to report to.
>
> I am sick of hearing lectures on this. It is simply NOT true that free
> software follows a single model of development. There are many projects
> and all have their own methods, some formal and some not very formal. But
> the idea that there is ONE method is simply nonsense. You really ought to
> know better.
Well strictly speaking I blurred a distinction in that not all free software
projects are projects are volunteer projects at all. Projects like Mozilla and
Emacs are driven by a single entity with paid developers. But excluding
projects like that can you name a single project with a "formal" development
process that it requires its developers to follow?
And I'll note that my earlier sarcasm had a point. Projects that, while they
may be free software, are driven by a single commercial entity frequently
drive away any volunteer contributors with their onerous formal development
methodologies. Mozilla in particular spent years angsting over why they were
failing to attract any community contributors.
I'm involved in a fairly large number of free software projects, and have been
involved in a great deal more in the past. Certainly all projects use various
tools to help. But where they do it's because those tools make their lives
easier. Not because it makes it easier for other people watching them.
If you phrase your argument in terms of milestones and progress updates and so
on and how those things will help other people make use of the work then
you're just going to find people continue to ignore it. The way to phrase the
argument if you want to win people over is by figuring out how your tools will
make the developers' lives easier.
--
greg