Open Source Software Model, Lifecycle & Development

1. OSS Model, Lifecycle &
Development
PRESENTED BY
SHAFIUL AZAM CHOWDHURY
STUDENT, CSE, BUET

2. Contents
 Open Source defined
 Pros & Cons of Open Source Software (OOS)
 OOS in developing countries
 Open Source Project Lifecycle
 A Proposed OOS Development Model

3. OOS Defined
 refers to software whose licenses give users 4
essential freedoms:
 to run the program for any purpose,
 to study the workings of the program, and modify the program
to suit specific needs,
 to redistribute copies of the program at no charge or for a fee,
and
 to improve the program, and release the improved,
modified version.
 OSS users do not pay royalties as no copyright
exists, in contrast to proprietary software.

4. “Traditional Software Development” – problems?
 Prone to time and cost overruns
 Largely unmaintainable
 Questionable quality and reliability
 Lack of user involvement: touted as
contributing to project failure
 Shortfalls in skilled personnel: Team members
with insufficient technical expertise
 price of license fees for software and tools required
 75% of software projects fail in one or more
of these measures.

5. OOS: Pros
 Collaborative, parallel development involving
source code sharing and reuse
 constant feedback and peer review
 Large pool of globally dispersed, highly talented,
motivated professionals: quality product
 Users are viewed as co-developers
 rapid release times
 OSS can be tested without cost: no license fee
 loosely centralized, cooperative community

6. User involvement in OOS
 Users: valued assets, treated as co-developers
 leads to code improvement and effective
debugging
 users assist developers in finding system faults and
improvements:
 reducing the need & cost for extra developers.

7. Motivation towards OOSD?
 No payment, then reasons for participation in open
source ?
 Projects range from
 Challenge
 improving skills, to altruism and fun
 financial reward

8. OOS: Cons!
 Absence of formal management structures: slow progress.
 “large, semi-organized mob with a fuzzy vision”
 Involving users closely can become problematic: tend to
create bureaucracies
 Meritocratic, ego-driven community: possible feature creep
 Programmer credibility > “keeping it simple”?
 Rapid releases: more iterations than commercial software:
management problem
 new release needs to be implemented
 informal requirements analysis: problematic. What to include in newer
version?
 „code-centric‟, targeted mainly at high-end power users. Less
attention on potential “non-technical” audience!
 confusion surrounding licensing models

9. OOS for Developing Countries
 Governments everywhere encourage the use of
OSS: motivated by savings in cost
 Potential development of a local software industry
 internationalization of software is a by-product.
 Governments and organizations stops worrying
about piracy
 Results in new business ventures
 Poor user-interface: opens business opportunity!
 Improvement in skill shortage in developing
countries.

10. Open Source Project
LIFECYCLE

11. Stages & Variables
 Typical PLC stages:
 Introduction
 Growth
 Maturity
 Decline / Revive
 Project Life Cycle Graph
 Independent variable: Time
 Dependent variable: Sales / Profit / Downloads

12. Open Source Project Life Cycle

13. Stages of Open Source PLC
 Introduction: initial motivation for a project to
develop a software application
 produce a working version of the software
 sell the vision for the organization
 Growth: more users become aware of its existence.
 more feedback from the users regarding feature requests, bugs,
support requests, etc.
 Administration gives more focus on quality and sufficiency.

14. Stages of Open Source PLC
 Maturity: the project approaches critical mass.
 number of users and developers grows to a maximum size
 admins are involved in a significant amount of time enforcing
policies, evaluating others‟ code, and other non-development
functions
 Increases levels of delegation to the community members
 code becomes large enough to warrant multiple versions and releases
 Decline (or Revival)
 users find other solutions to their products, developers lose interest
 revival of the project community in response to a new
release/environmental or market change/motivated developers
 new growth or maturity stage 

15. Graphical Example

16. OSS Development Models
IN THE FOLLOWING SLIDE AN OOSD MODEL
(PROPOSED BY ROETS, MINNAAR, WRIGHT)
IS REFLECTED

17. Proposed OOSD Model

18. OOSD Model Phases
 Initiation
 Developed code/ initial version - used as a prototype for
further progress.
 Review-contribution cycle
 Independent peer review
 Prompt feedback
 pre-commit testing
 Launched once code is considered adequate for release
 Ensures new code does not break existing release
 Faulty code hampers project reputation

19. OOSD Model Phases (contd‟)
 Debugging-reincorporation cycle
 within the community web space
 No formal planned debugging: individuals volunteers
 The more people that seek, find and remove bugs, the
better the quality of the software
 Production release
 take the form of a prototype that can be used in the initiation
phase of the next iteration of that project

20. References
 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF OPEN
SOURCE PROJECTS: A LIFE CYCLE APPROACH
by Donald E. Wynn, Jr.
 OPEN SOURCE: TOWARDS SUCCESSFUL
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IN
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES by Rinette Roets,
MaryLou Minnaar & Kerry Wright
 The Internet
 Presentation prepared by: Shafiul Azam Chowdhury, Student
of Dept. of CSE, BUET