Hans Petter Dahle: Programvareindustrien og fri programvare - erfaringer fra FoU-prosjekter

FAMILIER

Programvareindustrien og fri
programvare –
erfaringer fra FoU-prosjekter

16. april 2009

Hans Petter Dahle
Prosjektleder
IKT-Norge

Norges Forskningsråd støttet COSI og OSIRIS prosjektene
Eureka ∑! 2023 Programme, ITEA projects COSI and OSIRIS IKT Norge, 19.05.09 1

FAMILIER

programvare –

Del 1

COSI prosjektet


JL-3

ITEA if-04031
Co-development using inner & Open Source in
Software Intensive systems

Start: 1.1.2006 (i Norge)
Varighet 3 år
Norske aktiviteter:
Først og fremst rundt prosesser

JL-4

Prosjektet Norsk COSI

Start: 1.1.2006 (i Norge)
Varighet 3 år
Norske aktiviteter:
 Fokus på prosesser, for distribuert utvikling
 Nasjonale demonstratorer

COSI GoOpen 2009
4

JL-5

COSI Consortium
Sweden
Norway

the Netherlands

Finland

Spain

12 partners in 5 countries
unique: 7 subcontractors in Norway
COSI GoOpen 2009
5

JL-6

Commodification of software

technology
losing
differentiating intellectual
property

te
ch
no
lo
gy
basic for the business

lif
e
cy
cl
e
commodity

wasting valuable
intra inter open cooperation
engineering
resources company companies

COSI GoOpen 2009
6

JL-7

Problem statement
How to manage the complexity of heterogeneous
distributed development
Challenges
 Larger groups working on the same software
 Development groups get more distributed
 Software shifts to commodity
 3rd party software is … …
…
increasingly used
COSI addressed this issue …
 WP1: Business & community models
 WP2: Process models
 WP3: Architecture

…
…
COSI GoOpen 2009
7

JL-8

COSI goals
1 distributed 2 agile 3 trust &
concurrent developments in understanding in
heterogeneous distributed open
development settings collaborations

outsourcing external
in house bounded
open
collaborations collaborations

company knowledge

control & & cost
ownership sharing

4 understand &
use the shift
software shift

COSI GoOpen 2009
8

JL-9

Leveraging OS opportunities

Open
process

repository
product

1 Practices 3 Using OSS
4 OSS products 5 Symbiotic
2 OS tools 4 Opening up relationship

process

repository
product

Closed

COSI GoOpen 2009
9

JL-10

Achieved COSI Goals
1 Introduced distributed concurrent heterogeneous
development
 Partners moved to community-style collaboration
 Applications architectures were restructured with OS
tools and OSS components
 …

in house bounded
open
company knowledge

control & & cost
ownership sharing

software shift

COSI GoOpen 2009
10

JL-11

Achieved COSI Goals
2 Introduced agile developments in distributed
settings
 Partners introduced inner-source and collaboration
oriented as their way of working
 Partners integrated OS processes with SOA & MDD
 …

in house bounded
open
company knowledge

control & & cost
ownership sharing

software shift

COSI GoOpen 2009
11

JL-12

Achieved COSI Goals
3 Improved trust and understanding of open
collaborations
 We now know how to build attractive open applications
& collaborations
 Corporate partners evaluated, introduced & influenced
OS tooling, e.g. subversion and GIT
 …

in house bounded
open
company knowledge

control & & cost
ownership sharing

software shift

COSI GoOpen 2009
12

JL-13

Achieved COSI Goals
4 Understanding & strategic use of the software shift
 Policies are established on ISS or OSS use
 We learned how to contribute & influence communities
 …

in house bounded
open
company knowledge

control & & cost
ownership sharing

software shift

COSI GoOpen 2009
13

JL-14

Case studies examples
 ICT-Norway/eZ Systems eZ Publish
 Improved community involvement for core product
 Improved process in place, but not much experience
yet
 ICT-Norway/Keymind KeyWatch
 Selection of open source tools used in own
development
 Going open source with own product

COSI GoOpen 2009
14

JL-15

Case studies examples
 ICT-Norway/Linpro OSS component selection
 Improved selection process
 More structured, documented and transparent
 Time and effort will be saved during component
evaluation and selection
 ICT-Norway/Linpro Nomadic Version control
 Because deltas are smaller, and limited in scope,
conflict resolution is easier to handle
 Developers that used SVK are very satisfied with it
 Problem concerning off-site development without
access to Linpro's Subversion server, was solved
COSI GoOpen 2009
15

JL-16

Developing with OS components
Selection, integration and life-
cycle issues
Keymind Computing

GoOpen 2009 Audun Jensvoll, Keymind Computing
16

JL-17

Develop with open source
components – the workflow

Find candidate components

Harvest Assessment
Select best candidate

Internal validation
Version control – snap shot
Prepare Integrate the component
- architecture wrapping
- domain adoption

Life cycle management
Consume - workaround / bug fix
- upgrade
Developer,
domain expert,
architect

17

JL-18

Harvesting
Find candidates Short-listing check list:

• Open source host sites Potential showstoppers:
Licence ok ?
• Community mailing lists Architecture ok ?

Community health / trust:
• General ”googling” Committed industrial partner
Community diversity

Assessing components Project health:
Mailing lists
• Apply check list Bug tracking
Version control
• Smaller is better Documentation

• Low risk is better Component health
Documented use /references
Reputation ok
Domain scope
Architecture compliance

18

JL-19

Prepare - Test
Test (usually only the chosen candidate component)
 Goal: Verify that the component will work in our context
 It is expensive to fail this selection
 Dependent of component type

 Small components:
 make a small prototype and test most important
functionality
 make a preliminary integration layer
(could be empty)
 patch only if we must
 timeframe: from a couple of hours to a day or two

comp system

19

JL-20

Prepare - Integrate
Loose coupling:
- Bind to snapshot from available (stable) release
- Never depend on future releases
- Use as is
- Wrapping: glue, integration layer, anticorruption
layer, access layer
- 2 aspects of integration:
- Domain - adapt to application’s domain language
(adapt to domain model, wrap in service)
- Translator
- Service provider
- Architecture: Maintainability, scalability, security,
distribution, etc.

20

JL-21

Consume
How to ”live with the component”
• Component included in development environment
• Preferably packed as library
• Under version control with source code and documentation
• Internal responsible, the component ”uncle”
• The developer who introduced the component, becomes
”internal responsible” (component uncle)
• Follow discussion and development
• Contribute to bug fix if relevant
• If patch is applied in our development, update documentation
appropriate
• Stay with the snapshot
• We don’t always need to upgrade to latest version (lazy
upgrading)
• Upgrade
• As bug fix
• Because of changed requirements to our application

21

JL-22

Challenges / conclusions
• Process applicable for smaller components
 Larger components (frameworks etc) has much more influence on
our application and requires more attention in all phases.
• Payback to the OSS communities
 We get a lot of value from OSS
 Respect licences
 If not committers or core developers, at least contribute as active
users
• Main value: Availability
 For us, availability is main the value of OSS
 Appreciate openness about status, bugs, etc
• Organizational structure
 Dependant of developer competence as “fisher men”
 Each component gets an uncle – take responsibility for the included
components. Binds some resources

22

JL-23

Revision-Controlled,
Distributed, and Nomadic
Development Using SVK
Linpro

GoOpen 2009 Martin T. Ranang, Linpro
23

JL-24

Linpro case study
 Linpro wanted to make it easy for their
developers to perform nomadic, distributed,
and fine-grained revision-controlled
development through the introduction of a set
of guidelines and the open-source tool SVK

24

JL-25

Context: Revision Control
 Serious software development, including OSS, use some
kind of version control
 Also known as source code management (SCM) or software
configuration management (SCM)
 Subversion has become the de-facto standard for revision
control for OSS projects
 Great improvements over CVS include
 atomic commit operations
 full revision history for renamed/moved files
 versioning of symbolic links

25

JL-26

Linpro Baseline Process
 Almost all* of Linpro's development is placed under revision
control with Subversion (SVN)‫‏‬
 Based on experience and reasoning, our developers have
found that fine-grained deltas, or commits with small
changes, reduce the effort needed to handle merge
conflicts, if they arise
 Consequently, Linpro's developers prefer fine-grained
deltas
 Linpro strives to keep an up-to-date repository of all non-
auto-generated material for every project on one of Linpro's
central servers
 If a developer is working off-site, the developer will perform
commits over a secure network connection, using the
svn+ssh protocol

26

JL-27

Linpro Improved Process
 Combining the use of the open-source tools Subversion
and SVK Linpro accommodated to nomadic, distributed,
revision-controlled development
 This enabled Linpro's developers to continue doing fine-
grained revision controlled development, but without the
constraint of having to connection to Linpro's central
revision-control repository for every revision-control
operation
 The improved process is documented in Linpro's
contribution to the COSI Library of Assets, “Revision-
controlled, Distributed, and Nomadic Development Using
SVK”

27

JL-28

Linpro Results
 The problem concerning off-site development without access to
Linpro's Subversion server, described in the baseline process, was
solved
 The developers that have used SVK are very satisfied with it
 It was a bit difficult to grasp which parts and actions of SVK that
interact and are dependent on each other
 There is still a risk of running into merge conflicts, but because the
deltas are smaller, and limited in scope, the conflict resolution is easier
to handle than when merging large commits
 Understanding how SVK works was a bit confusing because SVK
introduces a conceptual layer “above” Subversion but still shares a lot
of functionality and command names with Subversion
 A set of documented guidelines:
 The guidelines are documented in Linpro's contribution to the
COSI Library of Assets

28

JL-29

Incubator process

• Incubator process addresses the main risk of the OSS projects
• Provides an environment to achieve a stable release and gather a
healthy community
• Roles (e.g. Sponsor, Champion, Mentor, etc.)
• Tool for support for the newborn projects
• Workflow with phases and responsible role
• Existing projects’ experience is useful to the nascent projects
• Some structures responsible of making decisions are useful to
guarantee the projects are “compatible” with ecosystem
• Focus on architecture issues
• Avoids duplicating efforts

COSI GoOpen 2009
29

JL-30

3 ways to use open source
Use Open Source software
 Integrate open source software in products and
the development environment
Share own source in the open
 Open own (commodity) software
 Grow a community around it
 Use external maintenance and improvements
Practices – inner source
 Internal development with open source
practices

COSI GoOpen 2009
30

JL-31

OSS selection - learnings
 OSS selection is an important issue for software
developers
 Work with OSS evaluation and selection processes
resulted in different process models
 This reflects two common trends in software
development:
 More time is spent on assessing, tailoring and integrating
components
 Commodification leads to general availability of OSS
components
 Linpro established their own selection process

COSI GoOpen 2009
31

JL-32

OSS Selection – Case Studies Examples

 Each company has addressed challenging
issues within their organizations, and
improved their process accordingly.
 The selection processes differ with respect
to
 Selection scope (see next slide)
 The focus and purpose of the improvement to
the selection process

COSI GoOpen 2009
32

JL-33

OSS Selection – Case Studies Examples
 Different scope:
 Evaluation of single component vs. Selection from list of components
 Selection for single use (product/project) vs. Selection for multiple use
(organizational reuse)
 Selecting a component that will be part of a product vs. selecting a tool that
will be used in software development
 Different phases are covered (from evaluation only to full lifecycle).
 Evaluation criteria are linked to company opportunities and risks

COSI GoOpen 2009
33

JL-34

OSS selection – Results
 Selecting an OSS component needs to address company’s
 Requirements
 Purpose
 Goals
 Identify critical selection criteria and collect information to
assess them
 Understand licensing to avoid unwanted restrictions on a
product or service
 Community assessment is a crucial criteria in most cases
 Do not forget to assess the components functionality

COSI GoOpen 2009
34

JL-35

Journals.Conferences and workshops papers
 22 conference papers and 12 workshop papers on
international conferences
 Academic
• International Conference on Open Source Systems
• International Conference on Quality Software
• International Conference on Software Maintenance
• International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages
and Systems
• ….
 Practitioners
• Eclipse Summit Europe
• Subversion Conference
• Linux Conf Europe
• ….
 Journals (5)
 IEEE Software (3)
 IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
 International Journal of Business Innovation and Research

COSI GoOpen 2009
35

JL-36

Dissemination
 Achievements:
 More than 50 publications by COSI members
 4 main events organised
 Many more events attended
 Significant internet based dissemination. Web site has
been maintained alive and full of contents
 Web sites:
 Library of assets hosted by Friprog
(Norwegian Open Source Competence Center)
• www.friprog.no/Laer-mer/Prosjekter/COSI-Library-of-Assets
 External COSI website will be maintained during 3
more years
• www.itea-cosi.org

COSI GoOpen 2009
36

JL-37

Internet
Library of Assets
 Collection of project results that are available for
the general public on the internet
 Addresses inner and open source related topics
 Contains
 Process descriptions
 Architecture designs
 Papers on issues studied during COSI
 Documented experiences from case studies
 …

COSI GoOpen 2009
37

JL-38

Conclusions – goals reached
1 distributed 2 agile 3 trust &
concurrent developments in understanding in
heterogeneous distributed open
development settings collaborations

in house bounded
open

company knowledge

control & & cost
ownership sharing

4 understand &
use the shift
software shift

COSI GoOpen 2009
38

FAMILIER

programvare –

Del 2

OSIRIS prosjektet


FAMILIER

Prosjektet Norsk OSIRIS

• Open Source tjenesteplattform
• Start: 1.7.2005 (i Norge)
• Varighet 3 år
• Norske aktiviteter:
• Bidrag til felles tjenesteplattform
• Nasjonale demonstrator prosjekter


FAMILIER

Open Source Infrastructure for Run-time Integration of Services

OSIRIS is an across-domain open source service platform that will
provide support for services provisioning, aggregation, delivery,
dynamic adaptation to the context and lifecycle management through
smooth integration of devices.
Domotic
Services

Service Surveillance
Provider

Internet
Home
Gateway Multimedia
Service/Content Services
Aggregator
Remote
Work
M
Ac obil e
ce
ss

GPS

Content
Provider
Management
Center


FAMILIER

An OSIRIS scenario

Architecture: OSIRIS


FAMILIER

OSGi


FAMILIER

Osiris architecture in a nutshell


FAMILIER

Demonstrators organisation

Business demonstrators

Financial services Mobile CRM Tax Services

Technology demonstrators

e2e demonstrator


FAMILIER

What the CRM demonstrator does

• Contact and Diary information available on the
mobile

• Live replication of CRM data from the central
database

• Abstract of a number of the last interactions
between his company and a specific customer

• Smart adaptation of services used
• Map and route planner depending on price, bandwidth,
accuracy

Norges Forskningsråd, IKT programmet, OSIRIS prosjektet
Eureka ∑! 2023 Programme, ITEA project ip04040, OSIRIS IKT Norge, 19.05.09 46

Demo

Eureka ∑! 2023 Programme, ITEA project ip04040, OSIRIS ICT Norway 5/19/09 47

FAMILIER

Mobile CRM service

TellU SuperOffice
CRM server
CRM Demo
Position

1
SMS
GSM
mobile 4
network MMS

Call 2 3
UMTS
Control
Firewall Firewall

GSN
Internet
SuperOffice CRM Client

Map provider


FAMILIER

Tax Service

Mobile OSIRIS OSIRIS
phone Internet Internet
Tax Authority
(Light Connector ex. 1 Connector ex. 2
Weight Web Services
Service frame Web Service
node)
protocol Client

Digital TellU Forms distribution
interactive TV and parsing system.
(Light weight
node) OSIRIS Profile Extensions

OSIRIS Basic Node

OSGi

JVM


FAMILIER
N y e r et ningslinjer for m obile og DTV
t jenest er

1. N av igasjon og
ar beids f y t
2. Feil
3. Søk og sp ør sm ål
4. Inp ut / out pu t -
t ek nik k er
5. Tid
6. Tek st og sp r åk
7. St em m e og ly d
8. Gr a fk k
9. Tall
Norges Forskningsråd, IKT programmet, OSIRIS prosjektet 10. Hjelp og sup p or t

FAMILIER

Utvikling
av skjemaer mobil Demonstrator
Skjema-
bygger • Skjema utvikles med skjemabygger
• Output format er XForms XML
• Skjema kan inneholde lyd og video
• Skjemaer lagres i en skjemabank
XForms
Skjema- • Skjemaer vises på mobil av Tellus
motor
skjemamotor i hht tilpasset Elmer
• Datafangst og validering utføres av
Tellus skjemamotor
• Resultat XML lagres i et passende
repository (Altinn)
Skjemamotor ligger dels på server og
dels på mobiltelefon eller Settop boks.
XForms
skjema- Det tar kort tid å utvikle et nytt skjema.
base Tiden er avhengig av kompleksiteten
på skjemaet.

Exploration

• SuperOffice
• mobile client under development, feature
complete now

• TellU:
• Own product Actor Frame published as Open
Source
• Part of Telenor’s connected objects platform
• Forms engine used when building services
• Focus on universal design for user interface

Eureka ∑! 2023 Programme, ITEA project ip04040, OSIRIS ICT Norway 5/19/09 52

FAMILIER

http://www.itea-osiris.org

Norges Forskningsråd, IKT programmet, OSIRIS prosjektet

Hans Petter Dahle: Programvareindustrien og fri programvare - erfaringer fra FoU-prosjekter

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (10)

Ähnlich wie Hans Petter Dahle: Programvareindustrien og fri programvare - erfaringer fra FoU-prosjekter

Ähnlich wie Hans Petter Dahle: Programvareindustrien og fri programvare - erfaringer fra FoU-prosjekter (20)

Mehr von Friprogsenteret

Mehr von Friprogsenteret (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Hans Petter Dahle: Programvareindustrien og fri programvare - erfaringer fra FoU-prosjekter