Thinking about the recent Groovy community threads and also about my first Apache Quill article on opensource.com, I’ve been thinking: what kind of ways would be useful to categorize or characterize different foundations or hosting organizations?
That is: if you wanted to help new project communities or companies choose where to go for governance assistance, what are some useful ways to categorize the existing foundations to make the differentiation clear, especially in different areas: community, types of code, licensing theory, funding, etc.
I think we (a number of ASF members, the Eclipse ExecDirector, and a handful of other community leadership types) gave some great advice to the Groovy community so they could make an informed decision on where they wanted to move. But the concept of better open source project governance is a common enough thing now that we need to step up the game on how we explain open source governance.
If I actually wanted to create a database of open source corporations/foundations, what ways might I describe the different ones in some sort of structure? Obviously, we can copy some governance/incorporation related attributes from any ontology, but there are a lot of communit interaction and expectation issues with open source groups that are very different from a traditional corporation or even a volunteer-based non-profit. In particular, licensing and openness (i.e. is it truly an open meritocracy or the like, or is it defacto controlled by one entity) are critical for newcomers to understand.
Looking for tips and suggestions for a new project I hope to launch this summer.