[Desktop_architects] [dtl_s_t_m] Adding some background information...

[Bryce Harrington]

On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 08:42:46PM +0900, Chang-Won Ahn (ETRI) wrote:
> On 6/9/06, SAKUMA Junichi <jun at osdl.jp> wrote:
> >Discussions
> >- Food for thoughts by Jun Iio, Mitsubishi Research Institute
> >  - Linux has only 5% share of the client market. Why so poor?
> >  - Do we let MS rule forever?
> >  - The OSS development model won't work sometimes with desktop
> >    app. users who are mere beneficiaries. Who develops the Linux
> >    desktop and how?

This is an important point, and one we all need to correct when the
question comes up.  Too often, software users are used to the idea of
developers and users being very distinct and separate things.  This is
certainly true in commercial, closed-source software.

But the whole idea of open source is that it is open _to users_.  With
few exceptions, most open source developers are really just users that
got very passionate and curious.  ;-)

Thus the OSS development model works when users go beyond being mere
beneficiaries and get involved in development.  It can often be hard for
users to recognize that they are so important, and have such
responsibility, because they are so accustomed to the old model.  But
they soon find that it is extremely empowering when they can solve their
own problem, and in doing so, solve the problem for many other people
like them.

I think this is an important idea to get across, especially when someone
expresses some confusion over how the OSS model can work.

> >- Nurturing developers
> >  - Some hesitate over getting into OSS development.
> >    - License issues are touchy.
> >    - Hackers are harsh.
> >  - OSS lacks documentation.
> >    - It shows that the developers has very little interest in
> >      popularity.
> >    - OOo is an exception. It has a lot of document writers in
> >      its community and has nurtured a business model in which
> >      companies and writers can collaborate on ducumentation.
> >    - Documents about APIs are definitely insufficient,
> >      e.g. gnome, gimp, evolution...
> >    - Obsolete even if documented, e.g. gtk...
> >    - Hackers always say "RTFSC!" but a lot of source code has
> >      dirty or wrong styles.

If you look at this right, it shows that there are many opportunities
for involvement.  As has already been mentioned earlier, liaisons could
be very valuable for helping new people to get involved in projects.  I
often find that when several people from the same country get involved
in Inkscape, it makes all of them much more comfortable.

As well, I notice that people from different cultures sometimes have
different ideas of what is polite vs. what is harsh, and often what
seems to be to be very curt and abrupt, was not actually meant to be so;
it is just how people in that culture communicate.  Perhaps with better
involvement of people from other cultures, the harshness can be tempered
and made more welcoming and friendly.

Documentation is always a problem; even closed source software suffers
from it.  But we musn't let that be an excuse.  Unfortunately, it's
usually true that the people who are best suited to write documentation
have the least motivation to create it.  Sometimes they can be convinced
to do so, especially if they are considerate about others that will be
following in their footsteps.  But more often it is necessary for others
to spot this as a need, and fulfil it.

When we started Inkscape, there was almost no documentation at all.  Yet
thanks to the hard work of many users, our user documentation is now
extremely good.  For example, we didn't have a User Manual originally; a
French user said he would work on one, but he didn't feel comfortable
writing so much in English, so he just did it in French, and we
translated from there.  Perhaps no coincidence we also have a very
active number of French Inkscape users.  :-)

Bryce