The "Doctor Who" Model of Open Source 116
Glyn Moody writes "Open source projects are generally fine when there's a long-term leader like Linus; but what happens when nobody is able or willing to run things for extended periods? Peter Murray-Rust explains how the open chemistry group known as the Blue Obelisk has evolved what he calls the 'Doctor Who Model of Open Source': 'You'll recall that every few years something fatal happens to the Doctor and you think he is going to die and there will never be another series. Then he regenerates. The new Doctor has a different personality, a different philosophy (though always on the side of good). It is never clear how long any Doctor will remain unregenerated or who will come after him. And this is a common theme in the Blue Obelisk.' Could other open source projects learn from this experience as long-term leaders start to move on?"
WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)
Doctor Who? We're talking about a contrivance that was used to explain away actors leaving a show. Meanwhile, in reality, open source projects leave a lot of code that may or may not be well-documented. Changing project managers every few years strikes me as rather difficult, although I guess if you can maintain interest in the project throughout, it could still be a success. Still, it seems like a warning sign to me, kind of like when a movie has 5 screenwriters or 5 editors.
That's all well and good but what if you get a tit (Score:4, Insightful)
For example, that Eccelson chap was a good first pick. When he sharted off to go do other things, Tennant was a good replacement. But now that Tennant is ready to pass the baton, the new pick they have looks like a total tit with his flock of seagulls hair. We might be stuck with a Doctor firmly entrenched in the 80's with all that entails. Simply naff.
Funny ... (Score:1, Insightful)
a reborn project is what the open source community already calls "forking".
WT?
-Hackus
Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't the same thing as saying anyone can just replace anyone. Matt Smith has some large expectations to meet when Tennant turns over the TARDIS key.
Linux is a great example. Linus doesn't do as much day-to-day programming in the kernel - he hasn't for years. None the less, there are dozens of people who do. Linux will continue long after Linus stops working on it.
I think there is a great danger if there exists a Cult of Personality in an organisation. While I firmly believe that Apple can do well after Steve Jobs leaves, he has built a Cult of Personality that will immediately cripple whoever follows.
Re:where does microsoft play in all this (Score:2, Insightful)
Cybermen. Embrace, extend, extinguish. The Daleks usually skip the first two parts, though in the case of the Bad Wolf arc finale-duology and at least one of the Cult of Skaro episodes, they've taken all three steps.
The Big Two. . . (Score:3, Insightful)
The Master Model: Ego-maniacal evil super-geek genius builds a kind of cool but scarily 'wrong' empire with no moral center, which woos the sheeple into obedience and generally locks down the whole of creation, apparently because lots of people being free and happy is a bad thing. I'm sure there's at least one world-spanning all-mighty software company out there which follows this model, but it is better not to utter its name aloud. . .
As for the Cyberman Model. . . A design ethic which envisions Smooth, Sleek, Uniform technology with the mission-statement of dumbing down and alleviating humanity of having to think about anything difficult through the use of simple but elegant ear pods? Whoever can pull off con jobs of that size and scope must also be an evil genius super-geek, though probably one who is somewhat easier to sympathize with. After all, he just wants to remove suffering and complexity from the human equation.
Open Source is very Doctor Who. Cobbled together from shared resources by a rag-tag team of unpaid geniuses who seem to derive altogether too much enjoyment from life while spreading the fruits of their labors far and wide.
The Doctor is Dead, Long Live the Doctor!
-FL
Re:WTF? (Score:2, Insightful)
Doctor Who? We're talking about a contrivance that was used to explain away actors leaving a show.
I think that was his point. At some point, actors and developers leave. They get tired of doing something, they want to try something else, they get pissed off at the audience/users, or get hit by a bus. If you have an ensemble cast (e.g. ER) it's easy to shift things around and continue even when all of the orignal people are gone. But what about a single-main character show/project? What happens when the main actor/developer, the guy the show/project is built around, leaves? Most of the time, that's it. The show/project is ended, with no new episodes/releases, and get's relegated to a "best of" DVD in a bargain bin somewhere, and everyone moves on.
But it doesn't have to be that way. Even though "the Face of X" is gone, you can still keep the show going. A new actor/developer can take the reigns as the lead. Sure, the personality may be different, and the philosophy and attitude may change a little, but the major premise and purpose of the show/program is still the same, and it still does more or less the same job it always did. When Doctor Who first did the "regeneration" thing, and even now when they do it, it is a big risk. - Will the audience like the new Doctor? Will they be disappointed that the old Doctor is gone? Will people still watch, or will they think it has jumped the shark? You put a brain-dead bozo in the role of the Doctor, who completely changes the tone of the show, and you're likely to lose your audience.
The trick is to plan for the change. We know now that the Doctor regenerates and that the show stays more or less the same, despite the fact that the actor changes, so we are willing to accept it. I think that's the lesson we should learn from the essay. Set up your projects so that it's role driven rather than person driven, so that when the lead developer quits, a new guy can easily slide into the lead developer role, with out having to be a clone of Steve/Guido/Larry/Linus. If your main developer quits, it doesn't mean you have to abandon the project. The project can go on, even if the guy who it (originally) was all about quits.
Another sci fi strategy (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Missing option (Score:2, Insightful)
A point well made ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Thanks for pointing out that using such a fucking horrible idea in your TV show is a horrible fucking idea for your OSS project as well.
I absolutely can not fucking stand the change of the Doctor. I understand the plot device, I understand that it makes it easy to replace the staring role if theres a problem, and I still think it is the most retarded plot device in the history of man, well short of that giant space worm in StarWars.
Just like the TV show, this sort of thing isn't a GOOD IDEA, its a great backup plan, but is fucking retarded if you plan on doing it on a regular basis, intentionally or otherwise. Bringing in new blood and ideas is fine, new leadership every few years is a good way to get no where as they all step in and prevent the work from the last guy from being completed because this new guy has an entirely different view of the world.