Ubuntu and TWiki

If you were looking for help on installing TWiki on Ubuntu, then please refer to TWikiOnUbuntu. This topic is all about the Ubuntu dev model, and how it might read onto TWiki.

Several times in the last year or so comments have been made suggesting that the Ubuntu dev model can be read onto TWiki dev. Given that Peter has stated an intention to base a governance proposal on this model, I thought it would be sensible to highlight some of my personal concerns, that I think reflect issues that are likely to be raised.

The following is my opinion based on experience and readings from the web, and as such may be based on misleading information. Please feel free to correct any misapprehension.

Origins

Ubuntu was started as a fork of the existing Debian Linux distribution by Canonical. The company started the fork, with a clear mission and clear ownership, and made the rules of engagement for open source developers clear from day one. They were very careful not to disrupt the Debian project too much in the process, and while they have taken a number of contributors away, the fruits of their labours often find their way back into Debian.

Canonical is answerable primarily to its owners, but is still careful to ensure no volunteer is alienated from the project by keeping contributors involved, openly discussing the processes, listening, and acting on what they hear. Canonical have also founded and funded the Ubuntu Foundation to ensure that continuity is assured if Canonical ever withdraws, and actively encourages the involvement of other commercial organisations in supporting and developing Ubuntu.

TWiki was started as an open source project. TWiki contributors are answerable only to the TWiki user community. Developers have been told from day one that they are contributing to an open source, unowned project, free of any controlling commercial interest. As far as I am aware, the only aspects of TWiki that are owned by any individual or company are the trademarks and copyrights on the contributions. While it has always been clear that Peter owns the TWiki trademark and logo, he has never AFAIK tried to assert ownership of the core code.

TWiki is close to Debian in nature, and TWiki users and developers have come to expect a "Debian flavour" to the project. If the principle of independance of the project is compromised, it is likely to drive users and developers away. TWiki has never had a successful fork, I believe in part because the project is independant and community-led, rendering a fork pointless.

Development

While Canonical based Ubuntu on the Debian codebase, it also added significant added value early in the fork, at the sole cost of the company. Ubuntu development is led by a core team of four Canonical employees, all of whom are among the top contributing developers. Other Canonical employees and interns also contribute heavily. Ubuntu is based on leading-edge Debian unstable, and their testing and QA activities have a direct and positive feedback effect on Debian releases.

Nobody debates the right of Canonical to direct Ubuntu development. They started the fork, after all, and wrote the rules of engagement. Despite this, the Ubuntu core team is very open to community direction. Canonical has also added significant value back to the Debian project it was forked from, to the ultimate benefit of both projects.

The model of TWiki development that was in place when I first contributed to the project was a core team of contributors, who very much controlled the decision making processes. My perception is that this control was exercised largely in closed discussions (private mailing lists etc). Since most of this original core team left the project, the development process has moved to a public process openly run on the web. Core development (not including extensions such as plugins and skins) has, to the best of my knowledge, been entirely done by volunteers both inside and outside the core team.

Currently there is no commercial entity playing a significant development role in TWiki, and no history of any commercial entity adding significant value to the TWiki core. That's not to say sponsorship wouldn't be welcome, but it hasn't been forthcoming yet.

Marketing

Ubuntu marketing is led by Canonical, which actively engages the community in the marketing effort, to the clear and unarguable benefit of the project first, company second. Canonical of course does well off the back of this, but my perception is that they are very careful to make sure that the project comes first, and that contributors retain ownership of their contributions and are publicly and regularly acknowledged. Ubuntu marketing is also consistently supportive of the parent Debian project.

Again much like Debian, TWiki marketing has been pretty awful. It has largely consisted of google hits, word of mouth and Peter's presentations at conferences. The main independant TWiki marketing tool, TWiki.org, has not improved noticeably for a number of years, despite being often cited as the worst possible advertisement for TWiki.

The TWiki marketing situation is pretty dire, and TWiki would certainly benefit from an Ubuntu-style fork that reflected well on it.

Summary

An Ubuntu-style governance model has proven to be an excellent solution for an Ubuntu-style project - i.e. a fully-friendly, commercially directed fork of an existing open-source project, with clear rules of engagement for potential contributors. As such I think the TWiki project should welcome any initiative to create such a fork, as it will ultimately reflect well back on the TWiki project. Of course to have credibility, the commercial entity behind the fork has to bring resources to the party, and has to support the parent project. Mark Shuttleworth, the money behind Canonical, continues to bring large amounts of investment to Ubuntu to make it all work.

The idea of a commercial entity taking Ubuntu-style control over an existing open source project is a lot harder to accept. I'm not aware of any successful move of this type - indeed, this sort of move has triggered implosions in a number open source projects in the past, most famously Mambo.

TWiki doesn't have a large development community, and it's possible that such a predatory takeover could be executed accepting the loss of the current developers. My personal feeling is that this would send an strongly negative signal to the user community. With so many competing technologies jostling TWiki for user and developer attention, I personally doubt that TWiki would survive.

-- Contributors: CrawfordCurrie - 12 Jun 2008

Discussion

What's quite close to the Debian<->Ubuntu<->Canonical model is TWiki.ORG<->TWiki.NET Would TWiki.NET be the fork as you've mentioned? Or would it require a different approach?

The main issues IMHO is the development community. It lacks drastically compared to Debian, not to even mention the momentum required within TWiki. Solving this part first will lead to TWiki's success, IMHO.

-- KwangErnLiew - 13 Jun 2008

I think, that Crawford's analysis is reasonable. Thanks for this insight.

-- MartinSeibert - 15 Jul 2008

Indeed a very clear description of both the situations, and that they are like apples and pears. I dont think Peter is Mark Shuttleworth as i typed in another page. I have never met Peter, but i did meet Mark and from what i have seen he is an entirely different person. That and the situation is completely different.

-- JoostKattegat - 23 Jul 2008