This is not the first time I have dabbled in open source software. From learning the minute details about git, navigating through BugZilla and issuing Pull Requests have all been a growing experience during the last semester and my small efforts are documented in my blog. But this blog is an effort to enhance those explorations and dive deeper to understand how open source continues to shape the lives of software companies, even though they may hate it at one point.

Define

In that spirit, it is essential to know what precisely open source software is and how it differs from, say, free software. I (well, mostly my professor) found two definitions of software that has a certain openness to its core and presents itself as an alternative to proprietary software:

1. The Open Source Initiative Definition
2. The Free Software Definition

“Why two definitions of software that is open to modification and extension,” you may ask. Well, like most things, the philosophy regarding what exactly is the antithesis of something differs. Free software and open source software are both opposites of proprietary software and represent the resistance against inextensible and clandestine software with limited intellectual property rights. I do not need to summarise the history of how both came into existence, neither do I think it is beneficial to have a drawn-out philosophical discussion about the differences between these. Those interested can check out Richard Stallman’s mini-essay on the topic.

Superset Relationship

Going through both open source and free software definitions, one immediately notices that the latter reads like a constitution; while, the former is similar to a checklist. The Open Source Initiative (OSI) definition encompasses any software whose source code is open, modifiable and redistributable in various shape or form (the actual permissions vary from licenses to licenses). Under this umbrella, there exists a movement; a manifesto led by Richard Stallman and his colleagues who think it is not enough to have open source code with permissive licenses. Instead, they wanted to ascertain that a repeat of AT&T’s closing down of Unix does not occur. Thus, the Free Software Foundation (FSF) was born who defined free software in a way that would ensure that its derivatives could not be used licentiously (pun intended) by powers that be. Why did Stallman create such a restrictively free license (or what came to be known as copyleft)? Once someone filters out the sanctimonious speech, the inherently paradoxical understanding of freedom, and the (slight) cult-like following, one begins to see the wisdom: exponential growth.

Apologist

Knowing all this, is it surprising, then, that the open source projects would have advocates popping up everywhere who advocates for a more open understanding of software? Is it inconceivable, then, that there would be entire companies and industries growing up surrounding the idea of open source software. But, how does one support a living on software that is free for everyone to see? Isn’t it the the age old question, how do you make money while staying true to your beliefs? When I hear answers to question like this in regards to open source, I always think to myself that it is too good to be true, and it usually is. But I cannot deny that there are certainly companies who have embraced this model and still have managed to pay proper wages to its employees. I wouldn’t mind joining them one day.

Activity

Talking the talk is one thing. Walking the walk, is an entirely different ballgame. Keeping that in mind, I decided to dive deeper into contributing to a real-world Open source (and data) software; namely, OpenStreetMap.

Now, effectively contributing to something like this requires a grasp over the surroundings of the neighbourhood and local establishments. As I played around with the map, I realized I know very little about the neighbourhood I actually live in. But, that’s a discussion for another day. For now, I decided to concentrate on the neighbourhood I thought I knew best – my college. Peeking around the area, I realized that I could make quite a few additions to the map. Like some of my peers, I decided to make at least five changes. So, what exactly did I change?

1. I added a fast food corner that I used to frequent quite a bit.
2. While adding the first one, I realized a Chipotle near it was also missing.
3. In the same avenue, a Nike Store was also missing.
4. Next, I found my college’s theatre building missing as well. Gasp!
5. Finally, I added a CVS that’s right down the block from my college.

Looking around, I realized the OpenStreetMap was missing a lot of sophisticated navigation that Google and Microsoft had already integrated. One could argue that open-source software would always be inferior to proprietary solutions. While that is an argument for another day, I felt my heart fill up since I made some contributions to the greater community – wherever they may be.