The governance of open source initiatives: what does it mean to be community managed?
The concept of ‘open source’ software initially referred to software projects managed by grassroots communities in public forums. Since 1998, the concept has been adapted and diffused to new settings that extend beyond software. While the open source community has maintained control over which software licenses can be considered ‘open source’, little attention has been paid to the elements that constitute community management. More private parties now contribute to OSS communities and more hybrid governance models have emerged. Before we can understand how hybrid models differ from a community managed model, a more precise definition is needed. This essay takes a step in this direction by identifying five core principles critical to community-managed governance. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Hertel, Guido & Niedner, Sven & Herrmann, Stefanie, 2003. "Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: an Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1159-1177, July.
- Dalle, Jean-Michel & Jullien, Nicolas, 2003. "'Libre' software: turning fads into institutions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 1-11, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jmgtgv:v:11:y:2007:i:2:p:139-150. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.