A Historical Account of the Value of Free and Open Source Software: From Software Commune to Commercial Commons

Bergquist, Magnus; Ljungberg, Jan; Rolandsson, Bertil

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-24418-6_13

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…. ] can be traced back to the "hacker culture" that created Unix, Linux, and parts of the Internet infrastructure' (Zhao and Elbaum, 2003, 66; see also Bergquist et al, 2011;Hippel and Krogh, 2003;Kelty, 2008). Open source as production and development model ensures that anyone may have unrestricted access to a product's structure, blueprint, and design.…”

Section: Hacking Cultures: Foss/free and Open-source Hardwarementioning

confidence: 99%

Hacking events: Project development practices and technology use at hackathons

Richterich

2017

Convergence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hackathons are techno-creative events during which participants get together in a physical location. They may be hosted by civic communities, corporations or public institutions. Working individually or in teams, usually for several days, participants develop projects such as hardware or software prototypes. Based on a digital ethnography of two events in the Netherlands and Denmark, this article investigates project development practices at hackathons. In particular, it analyses how participants organized their project work and which technologies were used in support of their creative endeavours. Hackathons are increasingly competitive rather than collaborative events, involving time pressure, inducements such as prizes, and requiring efficient skills utilization. I argue that this facilitates the following tendencies: Firstly, strategic effort is put into final presentations. Projects need to be convincingly presented, and persuasively pitching an idea becomes crucial. Secondly, there is only limited time for personal learning, since participants’ existing skills need to be efficiently applied if a team wants to stay competitive. This encourages division of labour within groups: a tendency which seems especially problematic given that IT skills biases are often expressed in terms of gender. Thirdly, participants are more inclined to use technologies that are proprietary but appear ‘open enough’. In light of this observation and by drawing on the concept of technology as resource and opportunity, I discuss the techno-political implications of utilized technologies. With this analysis, I aim at contributing to the critical debate on hackathons as productive but likewise ideologically significant fields of ‘hacking cultures’.

show abstract

Section: Hacking Cultures: Foss/free and Open-source Hardwarementioning

confidence: 99%

Hacking events: Project development practices and technology use at hackathons

Richterich

2017

Convergence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More specifically, much is owed to Bergquist et al's application of Boltanski's and Thévenot's justification framework to the development of the free and open-source software movement. 5 It is further applied here to the use of open source in LIS. Put briefly, the framework presents a typology that describes how actors in various settings justify means and initiatives.…”

Section: Theoretical Notementioning

confidence: 99%

Towards an Open Source-first Praxis in Libraries

McIlwain

2023

ITAL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In terms of utility and technical quality, open source software solutions have become a common option for many libraries. As barriers to adoption have been reduced and systems such as FOLIO appear poised to change the landscape of LIS technology, it is worth examining how the use of open source can support the normative core values of librarianship, and to outline a strategy for critical engagement with the technology that is beneficial to patrons and libraries. That strategy will require further codification, institutionalization and investigation of open source at many levels.

show abstract

“…The literature on open source software (OSS) development has contributed to a deep understanding of contributors' motivations (Lakhani & Wolf, 2005;Roberts et al, 2006), the organizational structuring and governance of OSS communities (Lee & Cole, 2003;O'Mahony & Ferraro, 2007), and how tasks are coordinated (Howison & Crowston, 2014;Malhotra & Majchrzak, 2012). However, the conditions of OSS development change rapidly as more and more companies become actively involved in OSS development (Bonaccorsi et al, 2006;Agerfalk & Fitzgerald, 2008;Colombo et al, 2014;Bergquist et al, 2011;Ho & Rai, 2017;Macredie & Mijinyawa, 2011), which leads to a growing overlap between OSS communities and OSS-involved companies. This overlap shifts the research focus to the differences between OSS communities and companies in terms of their organizational forms, cultures, norms, ideologies, and practices.…”

Section: Symposium Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%