Open Governance in Mobile - SFD 2013 - HSBXL
0 likes•550 views
The document discusses the state of open governance in various mobile software projects, specifically highlighting an index ranking projects based on governance criteria such as access, development, derivatives, and community structure. It lists several open source mobile platforms like Android, Tizen, and Sailfish OS, along with details about their respective governance and development environments. Additionally, it notes challenges in licensing and community engagement for these platforms, particularly focused on developer transparency and participation.
Open Governance in Mobile - SFD 2013 - HSBXL
- 1. Open Governance in Mobile Software Freedom Day 2013 - HSBXL Friedger Müffke
- 2. Report from 2011 ● VisionMobile Ltd. ● Author: Liz Laffan ● Partially funded by Webinos ● Open source projects: ○ Android ○ MeeGo ○ Linux ○ Qt ○ WebKit ○ Mozilla ○ Eclipse ○ Symbian
- 3. Results Open Governance Index 2011 1. Eclipse 84% 2. Linux 71% 3. WebKit 68% 4. Mozilla 65% 5. MeeGo 61% 6. Symbian 58% 7. Qt 58% 8. Android 23%
- 4. Open Governance Index 1. Access 2. Development 3. Derivatives 4. Community Structure
- 5. Access (19/45) 1. Is source code freely available to all developers, at the same time? 2. Is source code available under a permissive OSI- approved license? 3. Developer support mechanisms – are project mailing lists, forums, bug-tracking databases, source code repositories, developer documentation and developer tools available to all developers? 4. Is the project roadmap available publicly? 5. Transparency of decision mechanisms – are project meeting minutes/discussions publicly available such that it is possible to understand why and how decisions are made relating to the project?
- 6. Development (18/45) 1. Transparency of contributions and acceptance process – is the code contribution and acceptance, process clear, with progress updates of the contribution provided (via Bugzilla or similar)? 2. Transparency of contributions to the project – can you identify from whom source code contributions originated? 3. Accessibility to become a committer – are the requirements and process to become a committer documented, and is this an equitable process 4. Transparency of committers – can you identify who committers to the project are? 5. Does the contribution license require a copyright assignment, a copyright license or patent grant?
- 7. Derivatives (6/45) 1. Are trademarks used to control how and where the platform is used via enforcing a compliance process prior to distribution? 2. Are go-to-market channels for applications derivatives constrained by the project in terms of approval, distribution or discovery?
- 8. Community Structure (2/45) 1. Is the community structure flat or hierarchical (i.e., are there tiered rights depending on membership status?)
- 9. Open Source Mobile Platforms ● Android ○ Google ○ Replicant ○ CyanogenMod / Cyanogen Inc. ● Tizen ● Sailfish OS ● SHR ● Firefox OS ● Ubuntu Touch
- 10. Android ● Google - android.googlesource.com ○ Jean-Baptiste Quéru quits AOSP due to missing GPU driver on Nexus 10 (G+ post) ○ Make more core apps available via Google Play ○ Android Compatibility Program, Compatibility Test Suite ● Cyanogen Inc - github.com/CyanogenMod ○ Services around CM for manufacturers ○ Camera app Focal removed from CM (G+ post) ● Replicant - gitorious.org/replicant ○ Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli, Paul Kocialkowski ○ Only free software
- 11. Tizen 2 and 3 (IVI) Web apps Complicated licensing model (app challenge until 1 Nov 2013)
- 12. Sailfish OS ● Nemo project - open ● Mer project - open ● Sailfish Silica (QML/Qt) - closed by Jolla ● Compatible with Android apps ● Licensing under construction
- 13. Firefox OS Open as Mozilla See previous talk developer.mozilla.org/firefox_os
- 14. Ubuntu Touch ● Open as Ubuntu - see code of conduct ● No device yet - failed crowd funding ● Ubuntu for Android idea