Opensource.guide: [RFC] Getting Started > What does it mean to open source a project

[nayafia]

Hey open source maintainers! We would love your feedback on the Getting Started > What does it mean to open source a project article. We will leave this open for comments until Sep 1, 2016.

Does anything seem inconsistent with your experience? What is missing? Are there any other helpful resources on this topic?

Feel free to comment and discuss here, or even open a pull request to suggest changes.

View | Edit

[nayafia]

We also reviewed this content via #20.

[MikeMcQuaid]

Fixed the broken "View" link.

Emojis feel a little out of place but otherwise 👍

[steveklabnik]

There's one big thing that this section is leaving out: what is a license, anyway? If the audience is a the group of people who may not even know that a public repo without a license isn't open source, a short paragraph or two here would be extremely helpful.

[benbalter]

There are many reasons why a person or organization might want to open source a project

See http://ben.balter.com/2015/11/23/why-open-source/. I suspect there are more persuasive arguments we can highlight, especially "better code".

[mlinksva]

@benbalter your link is used in the next page https://github.github.io/open-source-handbook/getting-started/setting-expectations/ ... maybe a different list of reasons on two successive pages is repetitive? cc #46

@steveklabnik

leaving out: what is a license, anyway?

The page says what a license does; seemed enough detail for a getting started overview. The "legal details" link includes a bit more of a rationale https://github.github.io/open-source-handbook/getting-started/legal/#why-does-my-project-need-an-open-source-license that could be pulled up or restated in getting started if really necessary. cc #50

[steveklabnik]

@mlinksva hm, I do see that now. I think I actually left that comment before I got to that paragraph; maybe it's just a small ordering issue, or maybe I'm just extra nit-picky :)

[lee-dohm]

Because of this passage:

Remember: open source isn’t just for software! You can open source everything from data sets to websites to books.

I'm wondering if we should drop the use of the term "source code" and just use "source"? We only use the term "source code" in a couple places in that first page, but I feel like it might be confusing?

[joshsimmons]

This is great. One thought: Community comes up in "Branding" and "Preparing for launch" but I don't think it's ever made explicit that, if a maintainer wants collaborators, they should expect to take on the role of "community manager" (to one degree or another).

I see there's an entire section devoted to community building. I would suggest explicitly stating the above somewhere in the "Getting started" section and linking to "Building a community" from there.

[nayafia]

@lee-dohm great idea. I'll update throughout the handbook.

@joshsimmons you're right! I'll likely add this to the "Setting expectations" section.

[nayafia]

Closed per #106.