This is version 3.0
Copyright © 2000 Eric S. Raymond
Copyright
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Open Publication License, version 2.0.
$Date: 2002/08/02 09:02:14 $
Revision History | ||
---|---|---|
Revision 1.57 | 11 September 2000 | esr |
New major section ``How Many Eyeballs Tame Complexity''. | ||
Revision 1.52 | 28 August 2000 | esr |
MATLAB is a reinforcing parallel to Emacs. Corbatoó & Vyssotsky got it in 1965. | ||
Revision 1.51 | 24 August 2000 | esr |
First DocBook version. Minor updates to Fall 2000 on the time-sensitive material. | ||
Revision 1.49 | 5 May 2000 | esr |
Added the HBS note on deadlines and scheduling. | ||
Revision 1.51 | 31 August 1999 | esr |
This the version that O'Reilly printed in the first edition of the book. | ||
Revision 1.45 | 8 August 1999 | esr |
Added the endnotes on the Snafu Principle, (pre)historical examples of bazaar development, and originality in the bazaar. | ||
Revision 1.44 | 29 July 1999 | esr |
Added the ``On Management and the Maginot Line'' section, some insights about the usefulness of bazaars for exploring design space, and substantially improved the Epilog. | ||
Revision 1.40 | 20 Nov 1998 | esr |
Added a correction of Brooks based on the Halloween Documents. | ||
Revision 1.39 | 28 July 1998 | esr |
I removed Paul Eggert's 'graph on GPL vs. bazaar in response to cogent aguments from RMS on | ||
Revision 1.31 | February 10 1998 | esr |
Added ``Epilog: Netscape Embraces the Bazaar!'' | ||
Revision 1.29 | February 9 1998 | esr |
Changed ``free software'' to ``open source''. | ||
Revision 1.27 | 18 November 1997 | esr |
Added the Perl Conference anecdote. | ||
Revision 1.20 | 7 July 1997 | esr |
Added the bibliography. | ||
Revision 1.16 | 21 May 1997 | esr |
First official presentation at the Linux Kongress. |
Abstract
I anatomize a successful open-source project, fetchmail, that was run as a deliberate test of the surprising theories about software engineering suggested by the history of Linux. I discuss these theories in terms of two fundamentally different development styles, the ``cathedral'' model of most of the commercial world versus the ``bazaar'' model of the Linux world. I show that these models derive from opposing assumptions about the nature of the software-debugging task. I then make a sustained argument from the Linux experience for the proposition that ``Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow'', suggest productive analogies with other self-correcting systems of selfish agents, and conclude with some exploration of the implications of this insight for the future of software.
Table of Contents