Fork me on GitHub
Subscribe to RSS Feed

Kit Plummer
Software Engineer :: Techitect :: Evangelist
kitplummer (AIM,Yahoo!IM,Gtalk,Skype)

To the top »

Please share:


It is widely known that the Open Source community uses a different approach (Bazaar) to software engineering – over traditional, proprietary environments (Cathedral)1. However, there are many opportunities to apply Open Source practices to internal software engineering efforts, where the software product is consumed by another internal organization. Integrating these practices is not trivial…though in most cases it is just a matter of utilizing a few new, or different tools. In some cases, there may need to be a cultural shift, or simply a new awareness.

In order to avoid any confusion in the distinction between true Open Source development, where there is a “public” interface and intra-organizational development I’d like to call the generic practices found in the Open Source world Community-Based Development (CBD).

CBD serves the environment where one team is developing software that has consumption potential. Notice I didn’t say reuse, which is a chokepoint for many engineers. Consumption, in this case, means library, API, or interface implementation – not source code copy n’ paste. The “customer” is another developer, or engineering project. CBD is about optimizing this kind of relationship, especially where the customer is proactive in the development of the source product.


There are a few key functions, or tools used in this provider-customer relationship – many of which are clearly defined in Producing Open Source Software 2.

Here’s the quick (not all inclusive) breakdown:

  • Mailing lists – Dev, Announcements, Users, Builds, etc.
  • RSS feeds – Tie into mailing lists, issue tracking
  • Issue Tracking
  • SCM
  • Wiki
  • Search (projects and code)
  • Admin Management (Users, Roles, Project setup, etc.)
  • Web Site

On the Open Source side of the fence these tools are usually consolidated, and provided from a single user-interface (website). In many cases, projects are homed into a parent structure, provided by a “hosting” service. There are a few examples such as SourceForge.net3, or Java.net4 which front-end many projects. The software platforms that provide these infrastructures are available for commercial application in both proprietary and Open Source form. In addition, there project infrastructure suites such as Redmine.org5 that are designed specifically for internal/team-centric software engineering collaboration.


There are a few “tough” questions that arise when considering CBD, especially as applied to internal relationships. The first, and probably most obvious, is how to integrate CBD with existing processes and methodologies. Existing processes can usually accommodate CBD with little pain. CBD is a complimentary environment, and can integrate seamlessly in to any methodology (waterfall, spiral, agile). Where things get really complicated is in the tooling. Most development environments are already using individual tools to perform specific functions (e.g. issue tracking, project management). How CBD is applied where existing tools are entrenched – should not be a replacement effort. Although, there may be some duplication – the idea is to expose the integrated collaboration tool suite to both the product developer(s) and the customer, or product consumer/integrator. Continuous integration environments shouldn’t be affected – as the source code repository is independent from the project suite.


Keep in mind that the developer-developer relationship requires that the consumer have the ability to search/discovery the internal software product. Just having code in a repository with an associated issue tracking system doesn’t lend itself as available for consummation. This is why the SourceForge (centralized collection of projects) is prevalent in the Open Source community. Having a centralized source of CBD projects leads to the potential for consummation because they can be discovered.


In order to maintain a “community” project there is a requisite membership ideal. Usually, the project owner plays the leadership role, whereas the consumer plays member (active or passive). CBD requires members be given roles to control access to data, ability to commit changes, as well as general project management activities. Again, having the consolidated project environment ensures that user administration is consistent across all projects, as well as providing a potential for parent-sub project relationships. The consolidated suite of tools also ensures that the project owner can control the roles and privileges without implicating administrative personnel.


The idea of a community-based approach to software engineering is based on the principle that the consumer is integral in the development, much in the same way as Agile Methodologies manage the customer relationship. The consumer’s activity may be as simple as reviewing/editing documentation or providing input via issues and bug reports. Or, it can be as proactive as the consumer writing code and submitting it to the project. Regardless, the objective is to maintain the codebase for the continued and growing consumption without duplicating anything across the organization. Internal to an organization, there may be boundaries specified by contract, external customers, or functional hierarchies that make it difficult for software to be reused. The notion of CBD can help overcome this by removing the demarcations and continuously improving the “wheel” without starting over.


Please comment:
blog comments powered by Disqus