The Open Source Program Office: If It's Such a Good Idea, Why Haven't We Been Doing It?
summary
Claims that managing open source strategically via an open source program office improves risk and reuse but faces three concrete frictions: regulators citing outdated guidance (FFIEC guidance cites a 2004 paper and even recommends blocking access to shareware sites), large bureaucratic orgs that reward staying in-lane instead of contribution, and widespread confusion about what “open source” means. Notes that millions of OSS libraries lack vendor support (unlike Cassandra/Kafka/Hadoop), and recommends reframing fixes as engineering work and aligning policy with modern tools like inner source and git.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (9)
- 0:00Intro
- 0:31Overview
- 1:05Assumptions
- 2:44Why
- 3:36Open Source Definition
- 5:36The Adoption Curve
- 8:11Corporate Culture
- 11:20bureaucratic organization
- 18:24closing remarks
related talks
40mThree Cs to an Open Source Program Office
15mHow to set up an Open Source Program Office? Get insights and use cases from the OSPO Alliance
29mOpen Source and IP Departments: Risk Containment and Portfolio Management
43mFostering an Open Source Culture
23mThe Path to Open Source for the Traditional Enterprise
33mThe Cathedral, the Bazaar, and the Coffee House
01h 39mWorkshop: Building and Managing an Open Source Program Office
34mConsumers To Contributors: Open Source As a Competitive Advantage