-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 201
[Pattern Draft] Require InnerSource before Open Source #776
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from 4 commits
6407bbb
78e740c
56bd23b
a070b94
ff5699b
40f32c8
7a03c91
b92c0ff
6b91291
1431086
dd51b1f
67a20a8
f6e8485
88b65fa
4d62949
9633118
d3a6157
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@ | ||
# Title | ||
|
||
Require InnerSource before Open Source | ||
|
||
## Patlet | ||
|
||
Organizations often struggle with maintaining and managing open source projects due to a lack of internal collaboration practices and infrastructure. By requiring projects to be InnerSource before becoming open source, teams can establish the necessary internal support, governance, and collaboration skills needed for successful community engagement. | ||
|
||
## Problem | ||
|
||
When a project is released as open source without first building a strong internal contributor base, it may face challenges such as insufficient documentation, unclear governance, and difficulty managing external contributions. Without prior experience in collaborative development, maintainers may struggle to handle the influx of external contributors, resulting in an unsuccessful or unsustainable open source project. | ||
|
||
## Story | ||
|
||
A large tech company once open-sourced a widely used internal tool, expecting external developers to contribute immediately. However, due to a lack of contributor guidelines, onboarding processes, and structured governance, external adoption was low, and internal maintainers were overwhelmed with unstructured contributions and support requests. | ||
|
||
After seeing this, the company implemented an InnerSource-first policy, ensuring internal teams could practice open collaboration before releasing future projects as open source. | ||
|
||
## Context | ||
|
||
This pattern applies in organizations that: | ||
|
||
- Want to release internal software as open source. | ||
- Lack structured internal collaboration processes. | ||
- Have teams unfamiliar with maintaining open source projects. | ||
- Need to establish internal governance and contribution models before engaging the broader open source community. | ||
|
||
## Forces | ||
|
||
- **Collaboration Readiness**: Teams may not be used to handling external contributions or asynchronous collaboration. | ||
- **Documentation Gaps**: A lack of contributor guidelines, API documentation, and onboarding materials can hinder adoption. | ||
- **Governance & Ownership**: Without clear ownership and decision-making processes, project direction can become unclear. | ||
- **Support Burden**: Open source projects require active maintainers to review pull requests, address issues, and engage the community. | ||
- **Security & Compliance**: Code may require review to meet licensing and security requirements before being released publicly. | ||
|
||
## Solution | ||
|
||
Before making a project open source, require it to go through an InnerSource phase where: | ||
|
||
1. The project is made available internally for contributions from other teams. | ||
2. Clear documentation, contribution guidelines, and governance structures are established. | ||
3. Maintainers gain experience managing contributions, reviewing pull requests, and addressing issues. | ||
4. Internal adoption and success metrics are measured to determine if the project is ready for external release. | ||
spier marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
5. Feedback loops are created to refine processes before engaging a broader open source audience. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Thinking in feedback loops: a project can regress in its status, for example, cases of outdated documentation generate a "no longer innersource ready" alert, issue response time (helps to evaluate the quality of maintenance), etc. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Very true. We should describe somewhere that not all of these projects will always be turned into open source. It should be rather obvious but maybe we should spell it out :) This incubation phase as an InnerSource project is a quality gate, and not all projects can pass that gate. It is meant to achieve multiple things:
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree.
Here, for this case, I really don't have any examples to share. Maybe, if we consider the size of the organization, there may be cases where a project is great and could be used by several other companies and people, but as an innersource it may attract people interested in contributing because the technology or proposal is interesting but still not be cases of reuse by the organization's teams... does what I said make sense?
|
||
|
||
## Resulting Context | ||
|
||
- Teams develop the skills necessary to manage open source projects effectively. | ||
- Contributor documentation and governance structures are established and tested. | ||
- Internal adoption increases, providing validation of the project's value before external release. | ||
- The transition to open source is smoother, with better preparedness for external collaboration. | ||
|
||
## Rationale | ||
|
||
By requiring InnerSource before Open Source, organizations ensure that projects are equipped with the right practices and infrastructure to thrive in an open community. This approach mitigates risks, improves sustainability, and maximizes the chances of long-term success. | ||
|
||
## Known Instances | ||
|
||
TBD | ||
spier marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
## Status | ||
|
||
- Initial | ||
|
||
## Author(s) | ||
|
||
- Sebastian Spier | ||
|
||
## Alias | ||
|
||
- InnerSource as a Stepping Stone to Open Source | ||
- InnerSource before Open Source | ||
- InnerSource Incubation before Open Source |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.