open source development funding. openlayers 3 - 2013

Federal Office of Topography swisstopo

armasuisseFederal Office of Topography swisstopo

Open Source development funding

Use case: OpenLayers 3

Cédric Moullet (@cedricmoullet / [email protected] )

Head of FSDI Web Infrastructure

mailto:[email protected]


geo.admin.ch vision

Gather, optimise, network

The vision and objectives of geo.admin.ch cover all of the institutional arrangements, activities and technical developments needed to

establish an information technology platform for Swiss geospatial data and information in accordance with the new Geoinformation Act (GeoIG).


Legal basis: Geoinformation Act (1.7.2008)

Article 1: Aim

This Act has the aim of ensuring that geodata

relating to the territory of the Swiss Confederation

is made available for general use to the authorities of the Confederation, the cantons and communes, the private sector, the public and to academic and scientific institutions in a

sustainable, up-to-date, rapid and

easy manner, in the required quality and at a reasonable cost.


200+ geodataset freely accessible in map.geo.admin.ch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrTPRyQUtok

Softwar

e outd

ated

!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrTPRyQUtok


Context

• Open Source• Development of new software library


Open Source Community Structure

Users

Contributors

Committers

PSC

Capacity to develop

Capacity to finance


Software development challenges in Open Source context

1. Federate developers

2. Federate funders

3. Formalize relationships:– Within developers – Within funders– Between developers and funders


Crowdfunding definition

“Crowdfunding (alternately crowd financing, equity crowdfunding, crowd-sourced fundraising) is the collective effort of individuals who network and pool their money, usually via the Internet, to support efforts initiated by other people or organizations.”

Source: wikipédia


Funding models

• Feature oriented• Community oriented


Funding models: «feature oriented»

Funder B

Feature BBug B

Commiter B

Pays

Specifies

De

velo

ps

Commits

Open Source Software

Funder A

Feature ABug A

Commiter A

Pays

Specifies

De

velo

ps

Commits


Funding models: «feature oriented»

+ Agile

+ Efficient in bugfixing/additional development phase

- Lack of coordination / global responsibility- Not efficient for new development


Funding models: «feature oriented plattforms» - one example


Open Source Legal Entity

(association, consortium)

Funding models: «community oriented»

Funder B Commiter B

Open Source Software

Funder A Commiter ASpecifies

Pays

Commits

SpecifiesPays


Funding models: «community oriented»

+ Global responsibility by the legal entity

+ Coordination by the legal entity

+ Efficient for new development

- Requires consensus by the funders- Requires agreement between the main

Open Source actors- Heavy for bugfixing/additional

developments


1. Challenges: developers federation

Feature oriented model Community oriented model

• Risk that development is not accepted is quite high since one developer has not the full power on the community.

• Risk that features are heterogeneous is quite high since no global coordination occurs

• Risk that development is well accepted is quite high since the legal entity represents the majority of PSC members and committters

• Probability that features are homogeneous is quite high since a coordination occurs


2. Challenges: funders federation


• Difficulty to define a global feature list

• Funders focus on their specific needs

• Possibility to agree on a global feature list

• Possibility to encourage the funding (“follow me”)


3. Challenges: formalize relationships


• No relationships between developers

• Funders have no relationships

• Funders can request/contract only the features they pay

• Developers are coordinated within the legal entity

• Funders have a loose relationships, mainly based on confidence

• Bilateral contracts between funders and legal entity

• Possibility for the funders to specify all the features but only to pay some of them (if the legal entity accepts it)


Funding models comparison (new development)

Feature oriented Community oriented

0 +Perennity

0 +Cost sharing

0 -Control

0 -Ensure result

0 -Legal basis

0 +Future developments

0 +Benefits for others


Funding «OpenLayers 3»

swisstopo direction decided in 2012 to finance 100 kCHF if a global amount of 350 kCHF can be found.

«Community oriented» funding model has been chosen.

100+ crowdfunders (individuals, companies, administrations) have been found in one month for 350 kCHF.


Funding «OpenLayers 3» phases

1. Initialization: discuss / feel the need

2. Objectives definition

3. Crowdfunding campaign

4. Contract

5. Development

6. Usage


Crowdfunding tips and tricks

• Think worldwide• Interest the Open Source community• Direct and personal contacts are more

efficient• Important contributions can be found by

companies and administrations• Less important contributions of individuals

are still important since they show the interest/acceptance of the Open Source community


Crowdfunding issues

• An Open Source community is not a legal entity -> the important Open Source members have to create a legal entity (like an association or a consortium) in order to be able to make a contract with it.

• Legal difficulty to bind the contributions/requirements, particularly if various jurisdictions are present -> possibility for swiss contributors to make a “research contract” with the legal entity.


Results from the geo.admin.ch perspective

• New geoportal will be based on a modern web mapping library.

• Perennity of this library is ensured by the fact that the major actors have participated to its creation.

• Relatively modest investment.• Other entities (countries, cantons, cities,

companies, privates etc…) can benefit of this work.


www.geo.admin.ch

map.geo.admin.ch

api.geo.admin.ch

[email protected]

Twitter: @swiss_geoportal

THANK YOU

open source development funding. openlayers 3 - 2013

Technology