Search results

The paper has three purposes: the first is to provide a deeper understanding of the ideology and work practices of free and open source software development, the second to characterize the free software movement as a new type of computerization movement and the third to present a conceptual diagram and framework with an analysis showing how the free software computerization movement has evolved into an occupational community.

Qualitative data were collected over a four year period using a virtual ethnography in a study of free and open source software development and, in particular, a study of a free software community, GNUenterprise, located at www.gnuenterprise.org, which has the goal of developing a free enterprise resource planning software system.

It is concluded that the ideology of the free software movement continues to be one of the factors which mobilize people to contribute to free and open source software development. This movement represents a new type of computerization movement which promotes the investment of time in learning a new software development process instead of investment of money in the acquisition and use of new technology.

The research findings are limited by a detailed study of only one free software development project.

This paper is of significance to software developers and managers of firms who wish to incorporate free and open source software into their companies.

This research presents an original conceptual diagram and framework for how computerization movements have emerged into an occupational community.

According to its supporters open source software is more secure and reliable than proprietary code, and even tends to foster more innovation. Its technical superiority can be linked to the ongoing peer review process which typifies the open source model. In addition, programs such as Linux offer a potential challenge to the hegemony of Microsoft. Open source holds out the possibility of restraining platform leaders such as Microsoft from acting opportunistically. Some even argue that the open source code model is ethically superior to the proprietary model because of its transparency. Given these economic and social benefits, should government policy makers intervene, by tilting the playing field to open source programs? Would such government intervention truly be welfare‐enhancing? Before answering that question we note that some of the presumed technical and economic benefits of open source software are open to question. At the same time, the claims of moral superiority or social desirability are inflated and discount incentives necessary for software development. But even if this software were technically and morally superior, there is still no basis for government intervention. Our position is simple: the invisible hand of the market and not the visible hand of government should decide the fate of open source code. There is no identifiable market failure for the government to fix nor is there any plausible policy justification for giving open source software preferential treatment.

An intriguing development in the realm of commercial software has arisen over the last decade, from highly improbable beginnings. From its inception in the ‘hacker ethic’, freeware has had a huge impact on IT businesses around the world, most strongly in the guise of its spin‐off, open source software. The eventual consequences are that, for example, more than 60% of all the servers on the World Wide Web are running the Apache open source system, and Linux, the open source cousin of Unix, is challenging Microsoft’s products as the most popular business server operating system. Major IT users such as multinational banks, and major IT companies including IBM, Hewlett Packard, Sun Microsystems, Dell, Oracle, Informix, Intel, Fujitsu, AMD and Computer Associates are investing in and supporting Linux. In 1998, Netscape Communications made public (‘opened’) the source code for its Netscape web browser. In 1999 Apple published the source for the ‘Darwin’ core of its Mac OS X. The Perl freeware programming language continues to gain popularity for web‐based applications.

A multitude of transparency movements have been developed and grown strong in recent decades. Despite their growing influence, scholarly studies have focused on individual movements. The purpose of this paper is to make a pioneering contribution in defining transparency movements.

An exploratory approach has been used utilizing movement-specific professional and scholarly documents concerning 18 transparency movements.

Different traditions, ideologies of openness and aspects involving connections between movements have been identified as well as forms of organization.

This is the first attempt at identifying and defining transparency movements as a contemporary phenomenon.

The purpose of this paper is to open the special issue of Online Information Review on open knowledge management in higher education. Its aim is to review the concept and extension of the movement or philosophy of open knowledge in universities and higher education institutions.

The approach follows the reference model used by the University of Salamanca (Spain) to promote open knowledge in the institution through its Open Knowledge Office. This model comprises four areas: free software, open educational content and cultural dissemination, open science, and open innovation.

For each of the four areas mentioned above, milestones and the most significant projects are presented, showing how they are promoting publication and information transmission in an open environment, without restrictions and favouring knowledge dissemination in all fields.

Open knowledge is an approach which, although somewhat controversial, is growing relentlessly as cultural and scientific dissemination leave behind other interests or economic models. International organisations and governments are gradually embracing open knowledge as the way to share scientific advances with society and as an international cooperative way to assist development in third‐world countries.

There has been a recent surge of interest in open source software development, which involves developers at many different locations and organizations sharing code to develop and refine programs. To an economist, the behavior of individual programmers and commercial companies engaged in open source projects is initially startling. This paper makes a preliminary exploration of the economics of open source software. We highlight the extent to which labor economics, especially the literature on career concerns’, can explain many of these projects’ features. Aspects of the future of open source development process, however, remain somewhat difficult to predict with off-the-shelf’ economic models.

This study aims to explore the feasible use of free and open source software (FOSS) at a policy level in South Korea, which is reacting against being locked into only one technology company, Microsoft.

Based on participatory democratic theory, this paper suggests that the normative role of the state is as a public mediator in the development of an information technology (IT) infrastructure, encouraging greater freedom of choice and the establishment of an electronic environment – such as the community‐based use of software technology – for citizens to use easily and freely.

South Korean policymakers have explored FOSS as a kind of a political metaphor: at the international level, FOSS offers a rare opportunity to free the country from its technological dependence on transnational software vendors. At the national level, it is an engine for technological innovation and for market competition. However, the market or business paradigm has dominated most discussions of FOSS in Korea. As a result, the economic paradigm of FOSS is vulnerable and could easily surrender to the proprietary logic of the software market.

This study describes how the Korean government must maximize the societal benefits of FOSS within the public sector in order to reduce reliance on proprietary software and open the developmental path to alternative technologies.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the roles that libraries play in the development of open source software.

Analyses how the use of open source software implies freedom and flexibility for libraries.

This column is simply exploratory, and proposes the motivation for libraries to be more actively involved in the open source movement.

As libraries are also involved in discussions regarding open access publishing and open standards for metadata and protocols, so should they take a more active role in the testing and development of open source software. Taking this role will not only assist libraries in the furtherance of important digital projects but extend the primary activities of librarianship in general.

One of the values of this column is to present, via the convergence of the open initiatives, a motivation for libraries to be more actively involved in the open source movement as an extension of traditional librarianship and as an enhancement to the digital projects and services they are already engaged in.

In this essay we argue that the current social and ethical structure in the Open Source Software (OSS) Community stem from its roots in academia. The individual developers experience a level of autonomy similar to that of a faculty member. Furthermore, we assert that the Open Source Software Community’s social structure demands benevolent leadership. We argue that it is difficult to pass off low quality open source software as high quality software and that the Open Source development model offers strong accountability. Finally, we argue that Open Source Software introduces ethical challenges for universities and the software development community.

This article makes the case that the education community can learn from professional learning and innovation practices, collectively called “Working in the Open” (or “Working Open”), that have roots in the free/open source software (F/OSS) movement. These practices focus on values of transparency, collaboration and sharing within communities of experimentation. This paper aims to argues that Working Open offers a compelling approach to fostering distributed educational professional networks that focus on co-constructing new projects and best practices.

Insights presented here are based on three sources: expert perspectives on open source work practices gleaned through interviews and blog posts, a qualitative case analysis of a collaborative project enacted by a group of informal learning organizations within the Hive NYC Learning Network, a community of over 70 youth-facing organizations in New York City, as well as an overview of that network’s participation structures, and, finally, knowledge-building activities and discussions held within the Hive NYC community about the topic in situ. From these sources, the authors derived general principles to guide open work approaches.

The authors identify five practices deemed as central to Working Open: public storytelling and context setting, enabling community contribution, rapid prototyping “in the wild”, public reflection and documentation and, lastly, creating remixable work products. The authors describe these practices, show how they are enacted in situ, outline ways that Hive NYC stewards promote a Working Open organizational ecosystem and conclude with recommendations for utilizing a Working Open approach.

Drawing from the F/OSS movement, this article builds on standard practices of professional learning communities to provide an approach that focuses on pushing forward innovation and changes in practice as opposed to solely sharing reflections or observing practices.