The Most Controversial Topics

Sort by Controversy

Back Arrow Back

These topics were chosen from the first third across all responses from Q1-7 and Q12 with variances of ratings > 2.12.
Average
Totally
Irrelevant
Extremely
Relevant
No. of
Votes

1. What are the objectives of an IFHOSP site?

1.28 To provide training grounds for new developers
3.7  
19
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Noah To provide training grounds for new developers.

1.36 To distribute software that is useful
  4.1
18
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Noah To make useful software available to the world.
Comment made in round 2
Garrett Usefullness of the end product is not that important of a concept to the Free Software community or Open Source community.
Comment made in round 3
Terence This is subjective. Also, alpha code is typically NOT useful.

1.17 To provide data for research
  4.8
18
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Brendan in our research case, like yours, to understand how folks work in a voluntary framework
Comment made in round 3
Terence To the extent that people can review statistics associated w/ their specific projects/products and feed this information into their decisionmaking. For general research, such data is not the role of such a site.
Brendan trying to understand how people work together in voluntary organizations on the net will help improve those organizations

1.27 To facilitate the development of software that is affordable by everyone
3.8  
18
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Noah To facilitate the development of software that is affordable by everyone.

1.32 To provide tools needed to achieve the objectives of IFHOSP
2.7  
18
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Terence To provide a means of storing and updating source code
Garrett To allow projects to make announcements such as help wanted and releases.
Joseph coordination of participants (versioning system, bug-tracking,...)
Jacob Proivde common infrastructre for distributed software developement.
Incluing but not limited to version, control, bug management, mailing lists
Alvin To provide technical tools (such as CVS) to aid in development
Alvin To provide a method for making public new releases (like an announcement board)
Dave Provide a collaberative effort tools.
Luke To provide tools needed for open source projects to be started and managed with as little overhead as possible. Thereby leaving as much time as possible to actual development.
8 Responses
Comment made in round 3
Brent This is self-satisfying. Not valid.
Relevant Glossary
Concurrent Versions System

1.16 To serve the Free Software/Open Source community
3.4  
17
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Dave Provide good services to the comminuity.

1.24 To attract other Free Software/Open Source projects to come in and host on the site
  4.0
18
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Schulhoff Attract OSS development projects.

1.31 To provide an archive of Open Source/Free Software development related materials to the general public
3.1  
20
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark to reliably archive communication, documentation, and source code for retrieval by the public
Alvin To provide a method for publishing the result. (Downloads of files created)
Leslie Giving open source developers a place to show their work
3 Responses
Comment made in round 3
Terence If nothing else, this helps the developers satisfy their legal requirements to provide this information. It also helps attract potential new development talent to a project.

1.21 To make software with better quality available to the world
3.7  
19
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Brendan distribute a better mousetrap
Comment made in round 3
Terence In the sense of promoting code use/reuse to share knowledge/resources.
Brendan if not this then, why exist?

1.7 To promote existing project(s) hosted on site to users of software
3.2  
18
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Terence To advertise the code to other potential developers and users
Garrett To allow projects to make announcements such as help wanted and releases.
Alvin To provide a method for making public new releases (like an announcement board)
Jason To promote the software that belongs on that site.
4 Responses
Comment made in round 2
Joseph also duplicate

1.13 To provide a centralised location for Free Software/Open Source project(s)
3.8  
19
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark to act as a central location for developers to discover, browse and select from existing code bases, rather than rewriting.
William Collect and present everything relevant to an open source project,
both technology and marketing related.
Austin Provide a repository for source code and documentation that is fast and has high availability to developers and the user community.
Austin Serve as central site for recruiting and organizing contributors.
Luke Provide a location where users can keep track of projects/applications that are of interest to them. This should also allow the users to watch the workings of such projects in hopes that they would then find opportunities to become contributors.
5 Responses

2. What tools can be employed on an IFHOSP site and what are the important features and usability factors for each of them?

2.10 Wiki Wiki Web
3.9  
12
Details
Answer from Previous Round
Comment made in round 2
Neil Wiki is unbelievably hard to use. It's probably the worst implementation I've ever come across of the original dynabook ideal.
Relevant Glossary
Wiki Wiki Web

2.11 Security Measures (e.g. ssh)
2.3  
16
Details
Answer from Previous Round

2.9 Discussion Forum
2.9  
17
Details
Answer from Previous Round

2.12 News Stand
3.7  
15
Details
Answer from Previous Round

3. What work practices and culture should be promoted?

3.34 The practices of Extreme Programming
3.6  
13
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Noah Development practices along the lines of Extreme Programming.
Comment made in round 2
Chris While I practice XP myself and think it would apply well to a good number of projects, I don't think it would apply to *all* projects. The creators of XP are the first to admit this.
Neil This is very cool. Most sites do not help pair programming and refactoring, and it's necessary
Relevant Glossary
Extreme Programming

3.25 Avoid force
3.7  
11
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Brendan avoid force
Comment made in round 2
Chris This is good in general, but like 3.13, you have to give up at some point. If a project leader is being an idiot, try to work it out peacefully, but if it doesn't, then doing something forceful like forking the project or asking him out might be required to keep the levels of fun and interest up.
Neil eh?
Relevant Glossary
fork, or forking of a project

3.18 The value of heterogeneity, differences as assets
2.7  
13
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Schulhoff Acknowledgement of developers different cultural and technical backgrounds as a positive element - very different from corporate monocultures.
Alvin They shouldn't promote any particular practice. The heterogeneity of approaches is one of the strengths of the way things are done without these infrastructure sites.

3.2 Measurement of quality of code
3.2  
14
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Terence There should be objective measures of code maturity, and specific
prioritization for new features, etc.
Comment made in round 2
Chris Conventional measurements (LOCs, function points and so on) are not interesting. Open source software is partly about a kind of natural selection of code. Bad code causes crashes, which annoys people, hopefully including some developer that will fix it. You also have subjective measurement of code quality by the contributing developers: if your code is poor quality, people will not contribute to it. Having everything done in the open imposes a self-enforced level of code quality that is higher than what would have been done in private (or in a closed source project).
Comment made in round 3
Garrett Measuring the quality of code? You've got to be kidding me. It's hard enough deciding what "quality code" even is.
Relevant Glossary
Software Measurements (LOC, Function Points)

3.36 Standards coding style
3.1  
13
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Noah Strict adherence to the selecetd style for the programming language used.
Gabriel Adhere to commonly agreed upon coding and writing standards
Comment made in round 2
Neil K&R is Evil(tm). The "GNU Coding Standards" are wrong and lead directly to lesser quality code.
Relevant Glossary
GNU Coding Standards , K&R

3.4 Reinforcing explicit development roles
  4.3
14
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Terence Explicit descriptions (suggestions?) of development roles needed
to fill for project development.
Comment made in round 2
Chris Hackers are often jacks-of-all-trades. Pigeon-holing them is bad. But you will sometimes see one say that he won't do web site work and will have someone else maintain a web site for example.
Comment made in round 3
Garrett It's good for 'roles' to not be taken too stringently in FS/OS. Many of us are 'all-purpose' developers. The diversity we are exposed to can't let us get stuck in one 'role'.

3.19 Nothing should be 'promoted'.
  4.8
12
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Alvin They shouldn't promote any particular practice. The heterogeneity of approaches is one of the strengths of the way things are done without these infrastructure sites.
Comment made in round 2
Garrett Hosting sites are great places to promote projects which are successful, so that others will learn about them. Lack of knowledge about what quality projects exist is one of the great faults of the Free Software/Open Source community today.

3.5 Reuse of existing source code
2.4  
14
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark reuse of existing code by developers! sourceforge in particular fails horribly to promote a culture of reuse, by collecting and "ranking" statistics on such misguided metrics as "number of new commits to CVS". since sourceforge is a commercial venture, they want to promote the multiplicity of projects, but this behaviour undermines the central benefit of free software: reuse and modification of others' code.

clarification: the "number of new commits to CVS" is a very sourceforge-specific example, and is meaningless as a general survey concept. they also, for example, have a "new projects this week" statistic which is troubling. what I really wanted to get at was: don't focus the site purely on the "creation of new software" (though this is perhaps the most fun part of programming) but rather on "finding software which solves your problem". e.g. make it easy for one project to depend on another (or several others), make it easy to cross-reference documentation between projects, etc.
Relevant Glossary
Concurrent Versions System , SourceForge

3.14 Awareness of different culture and language background
2.9  
14
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Schulhoff Acknowledgement of developers different cultural and technical backgrounds as a positive element - very different from corporate monocultures.
Brendan tolerance toward others particularly across languages and cultures

3.11 Distributed style of development and decentralised decision-making
2.6  
14
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Jacob collborative and distribtuted software development
Patrick decentralised decision-making - necessary for scaling to large projects, but also important for encouraging developer involvement

3.13 Tolerance, respect and patience
2.4  
13
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Joanne The culture would have to be one of tolerance. Most open source software is still done by volunteers (who have other jobs). Deadlines must remain flexible. Teleconferencing must be at a mutually agreed upon time (people could be and probably will be in different time zones). Also, the more people working on a project, the more ideas will be generated. All participant's should be listened to. You get a better product and happier participants.
Phil respect other people
Brendan tolerance toward others particularly across languages and cultures
Brendan patience but firmness
4 Responses
Comment made in round 2
Chris This is important, but the natural selection scheme of open source depends on the bad ideas being culled. Being too nice to someone that is an idiot and keep introducing bad ideas in a design is wrong. You give people a few chances when they mess things up, but at some point you have to say "stop".

3.31 Flexibility in tools for rapid project administration
3.3  
13
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Luke Flexibility: Open Source projects are dynamic and can be very fast moving and have the potential to break new ground. The tools must then be flexible and allow the project admins as much control over the tools as possible.

3.32 A system to attribute credit
2.8  
14
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Luke Credit: There must be a kudo system to credit active contributors
Comment made in round 2
Chris One of the motivation of open source is getting credit and recognition (instead of money), so there should definitely be a way to get "paid". But at the same time, systematizing this kind of thing could seem wrong and counter to some programming practices (egoless programming, extreme programming).
Neil USeful for those who wish to brag, or more important when a projects copyright is being tested
Comment made in round 3
Garrett Since many of us aren't being paid, it helps a lot if we get credit in the 'noosphere', as ERS has written about.
Relevant Glossary
Egoless Programming

3.37 Fun and good spirit and hope
1.8  
13
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Leslie Fun and good spirit and hope
Comment made in round 2
Chris We're not being paid for this, remember? If it's not fun, nobody will do it. Now, it sure helps that some people have twisted and sicks ideas of what is fun, that is one of the things that the sheer numbers of open source helps... :-)
Neil If you don't like it, don't do it.

4. What are factors that movitate users to use an IFHOSP site?

4.12 Many tools are provided
3.1  
8
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Jacob One stop prepakced solution that provides a great deal of needed
infrastructure that otherwise would be reinvented
Alvin Available tools

4.11 High security
2.7  
9
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Alvin Reliability. (is the machine going to get broken into? Are the CVS servers going to go down? Do they do regular backups?)
Relevant Glossary
Concurrent Versions System

4.24 To compete with other projects
  5.0
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Luke Competition with other projects, so long as the IFHOSP maintains activity reports and rankings
Comment made in round 3
Garrett Pride pushes me, at least, to compete with other projects.

4.25 Users of software hosted on IFHOSP will use the site
3.0  
7
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Jason If they are using the software available on that site

4.4 Low Cost or Free
2.2  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Schulhoff Cost - Hosting of the project is free.
Alvin Cost. (does the site have a monthly fee? Are there lots of banner ads?)
Brendan free stuff
3 Responses

4.5 Sufficiently large capacity (e.g. storage, cpu, memory)
2.8  
8
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark capacity (memory, storage, cpu)
Garrett The availability to use standard tools (e.g., CVS), yet hosted in a production capacity.
Comment made in round 2
Chris And bandwidth. :-)
Relevant Glossary
Concurrent Versions System

5. What are barriers that prevent users from using an IFHOSP site?

5.14 Intellectual property issues - the host of the IFHOSP may impose some rights to the projects hosted
2.9  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Jacob issues of intellectual property
Alvin Worry that the entity controlling the IFHOSP may do something negative with the project or that they may have some rights to the project by nature of the fact that it is hosted with them.
Comment made in round 2
Neil They should be hosting it for hosting and traffic's sake. If they want an interest, they should pay.

5.11 Not having enough control over the IFHOSP comparing with a local machine
3.3  
9
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Alvin Lack of features that can be had hosting a project on a locally controlled machine

5.15 Incompatibility with the format that users had in software development
3.3  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark incompatibility

clarification: the site may impose a set of tools, a community organization structure, and a development methodology which is not readily compatible with the way a user is already developing their software. this will prevent the user from moving from their private facility to the IFHOSP site. the IFHOSP site must be willing to provide "partial" service using the user's preferred tools and methodology, at least as a stopgap until the user converts to the IFHOSP site's preferred tools and methodology.

5.20 Difficult to casually browse or some information cannot be accessed without a username
2.6  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Dave Difficult to casually browse w/o a username

5.13 No control the content and the development direction of the IFHOSP
  4.0
8
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Jacob Lack of control over hosted content
Alvin Worry that the entity controlling the IFHOSP may do something negative with the project or that they may have some rights to the project by nature of the fact that it is hosted with them.

5.6 Low storage capacity
3.0  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark low capacity

5.12 Not trusting the host of the IFHOSP
3.2  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Alvin Worry that the entity controlling the IFHOSP may do something negative with the project or that they may have some rights to the project by nature of the fact that it is hosted with them.
Luke Fear that the IFHOSP will shut down and disrupt the project

5.19 The IFHOSP does not reach a critical mass of users and projects to achieve its advertising function
3.1  
9
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Schulhoff Critical mass - IFHOSP sites also functions as advertising locations for projects. The site must have a sufficient number of projects and users.

5.5 The opposite of the answers in question 4
2.0  
3
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Leslie the oposite of the former answer
Comment made in round 2
Neil The questions are out of order. This question is hard to answer as there's double negatives involved. Rephrase or drop.

5.8 The odd urge to pay for software rather than help build it yourself
  5.8
8
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Brendan the odd urge to pay for software rather than help build it yourself
Comment made in round 3
Garrett What 'odd urge'. I've certainly never had it :)

5.3 Low in technical skill, inexperience in using an IFHOSP
3.3  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Garrett Inexperience with the toolsets used
Joanne Not understanding how the IFHOSP works.
Brendan cluelessness
Brendan low geek level
4 Responses

5.17 Legal issues on software distribution
3.9  
9
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Alvin Worry about international laws, if you're writing an encryption package, it matters where the IFHOSP is located as to whether or not you would want to use it due to export laws, etc.
Comment made in round 2
Neil Only if they tried to claim (C) or some other interest in my work. Sourceforge doesn't.
Relevant Glossary
SourceForge

6. What are the positive results for users in using an IFHOSP site?

6.24 Interesting parties on a certain project can be found before the project begins
3.8  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Joanne Knowing, in advance, if there is interest in the project. (Are there any customers requesting it?)

6.18 Possibility of reviving dead projects
3.2  
9
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Garrett Of particular importance is the ability to revive dead projects. Without this ability, many projects would sit on someone's personal computer, forever gotten.

6.10 Flexibility, being able to select from many ways of doing things
3.3  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Brendan flexibility

clarification: being able to select from many ways of doing things

6.16 Greater possibility for getting community credit
3.0  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Luke Greater possibility for community kudos

6.22 Tools with better quality than individually hosted sites
1.8  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Michael Quality Assurance on the tools you use are done by more than your own local developer- and userbase, so problems are more likely to be fixed before they impair one of your developers/users.

7. What are the negative results for users in using an IFHOSP site?

7.8 Low cost in setup will encourage starting unserious projects
  4.0
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Michael Increased risk of being taken as an unserious project, as a project is easier to create, and having a complete toolset thus do not count as a significant investment in the project.

7.18 Limitation placed on Intellectual Property rights. Depending on the license under which you get to use the IFHOSP, you may suddenly find that you've allowed licensing you hadn't planned.
3.8  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Michael May influence IP rights. Depending on the license under which you get to use the IFHOSP, you may suddenly find that you've allowed licensing you hadn't planned.

7.7 Low cost in setup will encourage projects to be publish before they are ready
3.8  
9
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Michael It becomes more tempting to publish something before it is ready for publication as a project. This has negative effects for both the publicist (who may lose the ability to pull a good crowd when unveiling something that is ready to start hacking on).

7.9 No negative results
  4.7
3
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Garrett I believe there are no negative results.

7.6 Low cost in setup will encourage development of projects that are similar (reinvention of the wheel)
  4.2
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark increased instances of forking and/or "reinvention of the wheel", due to lower energy requirement for setting up "project" areas on infrastructure site. browsing existing code must be exceptionally well facilitated.
Relevant Glossary
fork, or forking of a project

7.5 Low cost in setup will encourage forking of projects
  4.7
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark increased instances of forking and/or "reinvention of the wheel", due to lower energy requirement for setting up "project" areas on infrastructure site. browsing existing code must be exceptionally well facilitated.
Relevant Glossary
fork, or forking of a project

7.12 Limited tool customisation
2.8  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Michael Limited tool customisation. A lot of tools has a lot of configurability; this is often limited by the IFHOSP site, and the chance of doing custom enhancements is lower. Using an IFHOSP site will (in a way) remove the tool from being open source for your purposes (beyond being free and potentially being debuggable.)

7.4 Possible extra "collaboration" with unwanted parties ("back-seat programmers", trolls)
3.1  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark possible extra "collaboration" with unwanted parties ("back-seat programmers", trolls). ability to operate private or semi-private developer groups necessary.

clarification: the ability to have private groups is a necessity _imposed_ by the negative factor of participation by unwanted extra developers. the ability to have private groups is _not_ a negative result of using the IFHOSP site itself.

12. What are other important issues in IFHOSP?

12.11 The acronym IFHOSP is pointlessly obscure
1.9  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Troy (I think the acronym IFHOSP is pointlessly obscure)
Comment made in round 2
Chris In question 12.12, I saw Freshmeat mentioned, while I was thinking of sites that hosts projects themselves, like SourceForge. I think of Freshmeat as a kind of Yahoo of projects, providing important things like categorizing and news related to open source projects. Thus, I answered things like "IFHOSP should not put too much emphasis on categorizing and news", because I was thinking that they should leave this kind of things to sites like Freshmeat. Now, if Freshmeat *is* an IFHOSP... :-)
Mark how about "host"?
Relevant Glossary
Freshmeat , SourceForge

12.13 A remedy of the administrator(s) of IFHOSP interfering with the development of project(s) is to provide mirroring or withdrawal paths for users if they want to host their projects elsewhere
2.5  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark possible loss of control over own work. administrators must be completely "hands off" the development, and always provide complete mirroring/withdrawl paths for users of the site.

12.7 IFHOSP sites need to focus on maximising productivity
2.9  
9
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Noah With sites like SourceForge, there is little need to set up your own infrastructure for an Open Source project. You can focus on more productive things, like the improvement of your favourite piece of software.
Relevant Glossary
SourceForge

12.12 Big IFHOSP are bad (e.g. Freshmeat) Small IFHOSP are good.
  5.2
12
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Leslie Cannot speak for other ours are small is good big is bad
freshmeat is to big for instance and the fun of helping people
mak their software available.
Relevant Glossary
Freshmeat

12.2 Maintaining a commitment to hosting only those projects which are under a sufficiently liberal license.
3.0  
10
Details
Answer from Previous Round
This sub-question is summarised from the following answer(s) from round 1
Mark maintaining a commitment to hosting only those projects which are under a sufficiently liberal license.


Back Arrow Back
Generated On: 24 Dec 2003