Forking Free and Open Source Software
Free and open source software may be legally forked without the approval of those currently managing a software project or distributing the software, per the definitions of "free software and "open source"":
- "Freedom 3: The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits"
- "3. Derived Works: Redistribution of modifications must be allowed, to allow legal sharing and to permit new features or repairs".
In free software, forks often result from a schism over different goals or personality clashes. In a fork, both parties assume nearly identical code bases, but typically only the larger group, or whoever controls the Web site, will retain the full original name and the associated user community. Thus, there is a reputation penalty associated with forking. The relationship between the different teams can be cordial or very bitter.
Eric S. Raymond, in his essay Homesteading the Noosphere, stated that "The most important characteristic of a fork is that it spawns competing projects that cannot later exchange code, splitting the potential developer community". He notes in the Jargon File:
Forking is considered a Bad Thing—not merely because it implies a lot of wasted effort in the future, but because forks tend to be accompanied by a great deal of strife and acrimony between the successor groups over issues of legitimacy, succession, and design direction. There is serious social pressure against forking. As a result, major forks (such as the Gnu-Emacs/XEmacs split, the fissioning of the 386BSD group into three daughter projects, and the short-lived GCC/EGCS split) are rare enough that they are remembered individually in hacker folklore.
David A. Wheeler notes four possible outcomes of a fork, with examples:
- The death of the fork. This is by far the most common case. It is easy to declare a fork, but considerable effort to continue independent development and support.
- A re-merging of the fork (e.g., egcs becoming "blessed" as the new version of gcc).
- The death of the original (e.g. the X.Org Server succeeding and XFree86 dying).
- Successful branching, typically with differentiation (e.g., OpenBSD and NetBSD).
More recently, distributed revision control (DVCS) tools have popularised a less emotive use of the term "fork", blurring the distinction with "branch". With a DVCS such as Mercurial or Git, the normal way to contribute to a project is to first branch the repository, and later seek to have your changes integrated with the main repository. Sites such as Github, Bitbucket and Launchpad provide free DVCS hosting expressly supporting independent branches, such that the technical, social and financial barriers to forking a source code repository are massively reduced.
Forks often restart version numbering from 0.1 or 1.0 even if the original software was at version 3.0, 4.0, or 5.0. An exception is when the forked software is designed to be a drop-in replacement of the original project, e.g. MariaDB for MySQL or LibreOffice for OpenOffice.org.
Read more about this topic: Fork (software Development)
Famous quotes containing the words free, open and/or source:
“I doubt if a single individual could be found from the whole of mankind free from some form of insanity. The only difference is one of degree. A man who sees a gourd and takes it for his wife is called insane because this happens to very few people.”
—Desiderius Erasmus (c. 1466–1536)
“The poorest children in a community now find the beneficent kindergarten open to them from the age of two-and-a-half to six years. Too young heretofore to be eligible to any public school, they have acquired in their babyhood the vicious tendencies of their own depraved neighborhoods; and to their environment at that tender age had been due the loss of decency and self-respect that no after example of education has been able to restore to them.”
—Virginia Thrall Smith (1836–1903)
“Discourses on humility are a source of pride in the vain and of humility in the humble. So those on scepticism cause believers to affirm. Few men speak humbly of humility, chastely of chastity, few doubtingly of scepticism.”
—Blaise Pascal (1623–1662)