Note: These are just musings. Scope TBD…
Related to Social Coding chat on the topic of the Commercial conflicts of interest in FOSS challenge, I wondered if there should be a further restriction of the (broad) scope of Social Coding Movement. I wrote there:
Btw, (F)OSS with corporates behind them as main drivers, e.g. open core models, are places where any 3rd-party users of the software should be particularly wary, as there are often a lot of hidden motives behind that open core that relate more to the commercial strategy of the companies involved. For Social Coding - which with the Free Software Development Lifecycle already has huge scope - it is likely best to limit in particular to Free Software and maybe further to the community-driven kinds.
So what is the current scope actually? We have these 3 high-level components (Triple-F ):
- Free software
- Free Software Development Lifecycle (FSDL)
This is hyper broad.
- FSDL includes the entirety of software development methods, as applied to FOSS as well as their related ecosystems (if any).
- Fediverse might be seen as one such ecosystem. The ‘technology substrate’ are the ActivityPub et al open standards.
A restriction of scope might be:
- Only community-driven, fully non-commercial FOSS
- Venn diagram of Free software and Fediverse, i.e. any FOSS project also prepared to leverage the Fediverse in their FSDL.