X-Git-Url: https://projects.mako.cc/source/fspm_howto/blobdiff_plain/5fe0333f964e93f5879ff2955201291cfa25dba4..44fb1663e93995abba200e89e1982e189194010b:/FreeSoftwareDevelopmentHOWTO.sgml diff --git a/FreeSoftwareDevelopmentHOWTO.sgml b/FreeSoftwareDevelopmentHOWTO.sgml index 1ef34da..ad8e78f 100644 --- a/FreeSoftwareDevelopmentHOWTO.sgml +++ b/FreeSoftwareDevelopmentHOWTO.sgml @@ -1217,9 +1217,9 @@ pages for more information and options. Maintaining a Project: Interacting with Developers - - fswd!developers - + + fswd!developers + Once you have gotten the project started, you have gotten over the @@ -1232,8 +1232,18 @@ pages for more information and options. - The difference between free software development and propriety - software development is th developer base. As the leader of a free + In releasing your program, your program becomes free software. This + transition is more than just a larger user base. By releasing your + program as free software, your software + becomes the free software community's + software. The direction of your software's development will be + reshaped, redirected, and fully determined by your users and, to a + larger extent, by other developers in the community. + + + + The major difference between free software development and propriety + software development is the developer base. As the leader of a free software project, you need to attract and keep developers in a way that leaders of proprietary software projects sipmly don't have to worry about. As the person leading development of a free @@ -1293,7 +1303,12 @@ pages for more information and options. Like anything, its easier to see how others delegate than to do - it yourself. In a sentance: Keep an eye out for other + it yourself. You may find that other developers seem even more + experienced or knowledgeable than you. Your job as a maintainer + does not mean you have to have to be the best or the + brightest. It means you need are responsible for showing good + judgement and for recognizing solutions that are maintainable and + are not. In a sentance: Keep an eye out for other qualified developers who show an interest and sustained involvement with your project and try and shift responsibility towards them. The following ideas might be good places @@ -1343,7 +1358,7 @@ pages for more information and options. - + Publicly appoint someone as the release manager for a specific release. @@ -1363,7 +1378,7 @@ pages for more information and options. - + Delegate control of an entire branch. If your project chooses to have branches (as described in Accepting and Rejecting Patches - - + + This HOWTO has already touched on the fact that as the maintainer + of a free software project, one of primary and most important + responsibilities will be accepting and rejecting patches submitted + to you by other developers. + + + + Technical judgement + + + In Open Source Development with CVS, Karl + Fogel makes a convincing argument that the most important things + to keep in mind are a firm knowledge of the scope of your program + (that's the idea I talked about in ) and the ability to recognize, + facilitate, and direct evolution of a free + software program so that the program can grow and change and + incorporate functionatlity that was orignally unforseen but avoid + digressions that might expand the scope of the program too much + and result and push the project towards an early death under its + own weight and unweildiness. These are the criteria that you as a + project mainatiner should take into account each time you recieve + a patch. + + + + Fogel elaborates on this again and states the the + questions to ask yourself when considering whether to implement + (or approve) a change are: + + + + + + Will it benefit a significant percentage of the program's + user community? + + + + Does it fit within the program's domain or within a + natural, intuitive extension of that domain? + + + + + + + The answers to these questions are never straighforward and its + very possible (and even likely) that the person who submitted the + patch may feel differently about the answer to those questions + than you do. However, if you feel that that the answer to either + of those questions is no, it is your responsiblity + to reject the change. If you fail to do this, the project will + become unweildy and unmaintainable and will ultimately fail. + + + + + Rejecting patches + + + Rejecting patches is probably the most difficult and the most + sesnative job that the maintainer of any free software project + has to face. But sometimes it has to be done. I mentioned earlier + (in and in ) that any developer needs to try and + balance your responsibility and power to make what you think are + the best technical decisions with the fact that you will lose + support from other developers if you seem like you are on a + powertrip or being overly bossy or possesive of a community-based + project. I recommend that you keep three major facts in mind when + rejecting patches (or other changes): + + + + Bring it to the community + + One of the best ways of justifying a decision to reject a patch + and working to not seem like you keep an iron grip on your + project is by not making the decision alone at all. It might + make sense to turn over larger proposed changes or more + difficult decisions to a development mailing list where they can + be discussed. There will be some patches (bug fixes, etc.) which + will definately be accepted and some that you feel are so off + base that they do not even merit further discussion. It is those + that fall into the grey area between these two groups that might + merit a quick forward to a mailing list. + + + + I recommend this process wholeheartedly. As the project + maintainer you are worried about making the best decision for + the project, for the project's users and developers, and for + yourself as a responsible project leader. Turning things over to + an email list will demonstrate your own responsible and + responsive leadership as it tests and serves the interests of + your software's community. + + + + + Technical issues is not always good justification + + Especially towards the beginning, you will find that many + changes are difficult to implement, introduce new bugs, or have + other techincal problems. Try to see past these. Especially with + added functionality, good ideas do not always come from good + coders. Technical merit is a valid reason to postpone the + application of a patch but it is not always a good reason to + reject a change outright. Even small changes are worth the + effort of working with the submittor to iron out bugs and + incorporate the change if you thing you think it seems like a + good addition to your project. The effort on your part will work + to make your project a community project and it will pull a new + or less experienced developer onto your project and even teach + them something that might help them in their next patch. + + + + + Common courtesy + + It should go without saying but, above all and in all + cases, just be nice. If someone has an idea and cares + about it enough to write some code and submit a patch, they + care, they are motivated, and they are already involved. Your + goal as the maintainer is make sure they submit again. They may + have thrown you a dud this time but next time may be the idea or + feature that revolutionizes your project. + + + + It is your responsibility to first justify your action to not + incorporate their change clearly and concisely. Then thank + them. Let them know that you a appreciate their help and feel + horrible that you can't incorproate their change. Let them know + that you look forward to their staying involved and you hope + that the next patch or idea meshes better with your project + because you appreciate their work and want to see it in the + project. If you have ever had a patch rejected that put a large + deal of time, thought, and energy into, you remember how it + feels and it feels bad. Keep this in mind when you have to let + someone down. It's never easy but you need to do everything you + have to make it as not-unpleasant as possible. + + + + Stable and Development Branches - + + + The idea of stable and development branches has already been + described briefly in and in + . These alluses attest to the fact + to some of the ways that multiple branches can affect your + software. Branches can let you avoid (to some extent) some of the + problems around rejecting patches (as described in ) by allowing you to temporarily compromise the + stability of your project without affected those users who need + that stability. + + + + The most common way of branching your project is to have one + branch that is stable and one that is development. This is the + model followed by the Linux kernel that is described in . In this model, there is always one + branch that is stable and always one that is in + development. Before any new release, the development branch goes + into a feature freeze where major changes and added + features are rejected or put on hold under the development kernel + is released as the new stable branch and major development begins + again on the development branch. Bug fixes and small changes that + are unlikely to have any large negative reprocussion are + incorporated into the stable branch also to the development + branch. + + + + Linux's model is an extreme one. On many projects, there is no + need to have two versions always available. It may make sense ot + have two versions only near a release. The Debian project has + historically made both a stable and an unstable distribution + available but has expanded to this to include: stable, unstable, + testing, experimental, and (around release time) a frozen + distribution that only incorporates bug fixes during the + transition from unstable to stable. There are few projects whose + size would necessitate a system like Debian but their use of + branches helps demonstrate how they can be used to balance + consitent and effective development with the need to make regular + and useable releases. + + + + In trying to set up a development tree for yourself, there are + several things that might be useful to keep in mind: + + + + + + + Minimize the number of branches + + + Debian may be able to make good use of four or five branches + but it contains gigabytes of software in over 5000 packages + compiled for a 5-6 different architectures. Two is a good + number. Too many branches will confuse your users (I can't + count how many times I had to describe debian's system when it + only had 2 and sometimes 3 branches!), potential developers + and even yourself. Branches can help but they come at a cost + so use them very sparingly. + + + + + + Make sure that all your different branches are explained + + + As I mentioned in the preceeding paragraph, different branches + will confuse your users. Do everything + you can to avoid this by clearly explaining the different + branches in a promenant page on your website and in a Readme + file in the FTP or HTTP + directory. + + + + I might also recommend against a mistake that I think Debian + has made. The terms unstable, + testing, and experimental are + vague and difficult to rank in order of stability (or + instability as the case may be). Try explaining to someone + that stable actually means ultra + stable and that unstable doesn't + actually include any unstable software but is really stable + software that is untested as a distribution. + + + + If you are going to do branches, especially early on, keep in + mind that people are conditioned to understand the terms + stable and development and you + probaly can't go wrong with this simple and common division of + branches. + + + + + + Make sure all your branches are always available + + + Like a lot of document, this should probably should go without + saying but experience has taught me that it's not always + obvious to people. It's a good idea to physicall split up + different branches in different directories or directory trees + on your FTP or HTTP + site. Linux accomplishes this by having all the v2.2 and a + v2.3 subdirectory where it is immediately obvious (after you + know their version numbering scheme) which directory is the + most recent stable and the current development + releases. Debian accomplishes this by naming all their + distribution by name and then changing symlinks named + stable, unstable and + frozen to point to which ever distribution (by + name) is in whatever stage. Both methods work and their are + others. In any case, it is important that different branches + are always available, are accessable from consistent + locations, and that different branches are clearly + distinguished from each other so your users know exactly what + they want to be downloading and where to get it. + + + + + + + Other Development issues - - + + There are more issues around surrounding interaction with + developers in a free software project that I can touch on in great + detail in a HOWTO of this size. Please don't hesitate to contact + me if you see any major omissions. Other smaller issues that are + worth mentioning are: + + + Freezing + + For those projects that choose to adopt a split development model + (), freezing is a concept that is worth + becoming familiar with. + + + + Freeze come in two major forms. A feature freeze + is a period when no signifigant functionality is added to a + program. It is a period where established functionality (even + skeletons of barely working functionality) can be improved and + perfected. It is a period where bugs are fixed. This type of + freeze is usually applied some period (a month or two) before a + release. It is easy to push a release back as you wait for + one more feature and a freeze helps to avoid this + situation by drawing the much neede line in the sand. It gives + developers room they need to get a program ready for release. + + + + The second type of freeze is a code freeze which + is much more like a released piece of software. Once a piece of + software has entered a code freeze, all changes to the code are + frowned upon and only changes that fix known bugs are + permitted. This type of freeze usually follows a feature + freeze and directly preceeds a release. Most released + software is in what could be interpreted as a sort of high + levelcode freeze. + + + + Even you do not choose to appoint a release manager (), you will have an easier time + justifying the rejection or postponement of patches ( before a release with a publicly stated + freeze in effect. + + + + Forking + + Forks are the most extreme interpretation of a branch. A fork is + when a group of developers takes code from a free software + project and actually starts a brand new free software + project. The most famous example of a fork is Emacs and + XEmacs. Both emacsen are based on an almost identical codebase + but for technical, political, and philisophical reasons, + development was split into two projects which now compete with + each other. + + + + The short version of the fork section is, don't do + them. Forks force developers to choose one project to + work with, cause nasty political divisions, redundancy of work. + Luckily, usually the threat of the fork is enough to scare the + maintainer or maintainers of a project into changing the way they + run their project to avoid it. + + + + In his chapter on The Open Source Process, Karl + Fogel describes how to do a fork if you absolutely must. If you + have determined that is absolutely necessary and that the + differences between you and the people threatening to fork are + absolutely unresolvable, I recommend Fogel's book as a good place + to start. + + + Maintaining a Project: Interacting with Users + + fswd!users + + + + If you've worked your way up to here, congratuatlions, you are + nearing the end of this document. This final section touches upon + - - fswd!users -