Differences between revisions 1 and 16 (spanning 15 versions)
Revision 1 as of 2007-09-18 18:55:28
Size: 1760
Editor: madduck
Comment:
Revision 16 as of 2009-03-16 03:29:40
Size: 1894
Editor: anonymous
Comment: converted to 1.6 markup
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 1: Line 1:
= Factors affecting diffusions in OSS = = Factors affecting tool adoption in OSS =
Line 3: Line 3:
The following factors influence the rate of adoption of tools in subject
communities. The theory is that certain aspects of a tool determine whether it will be quickly and widely used.

In this list, I attempt to bring together '''all factors''' which could have ''any'' influence on the rate of adoption, not only those likely to speed things up; my research is about finding out which ones make more of a difference and which ones can be safely ignored.

If you feel like adding your thoughts to a factor, please feel free. It would help if you'd prefix your comments with your name so that I know how to contact you if I have questions.

Also see ["madduck/adoptions"] for a list of tools which have or have not been adopted by developers of the Debian project. Feel free to extend this list as well.

I use the following categories for factors (please extend as you see fit):

* [/implementation Implementation]: how is a tool implemented? This is about code, language, style of development, modularity, accessibility to users interested in touching the code, etc.

* [/maintenance Maintenance status]: how well is the tool maintained? Does it distinguish between stable and unstable releases? Are unstable releases usable?

* [/community Community]: what are the traits of the developer and user communities around the tool? Is it vibrant? Open to newcomers? Helpful? Focused?

* [/direction Direction]: does the project follow a defined direction? Is there a manifesto? What happens with new ideas which may deviate a bit from a given direction?

* [/usability Usability]: how usable is the tool? Is it well-documented? Can it be used in more than one way? Does it have multiple interfaces?
'''THIS IS OBSOLETE. PLEASE GO HERE: http://phd.martin-krafft.net/wiki/factors/'''
##
## In this list, I attempt to bring together '''all factors''' which could have
## ''any'' influence on success ''or failure'' of a tool, however small; my
## research is about finding out which ones make more of a difference and which
## ones are less relevant.
##
## If you feel like adding your thoughts to a factor, please feel free.
## Especially helpful are examples of projects in which a given factor has had
## a positive impact, as well as those where a lack is having a negative impact.
##
## '''It would help if you'd prefix your comments with your name so that I know
## how to contact you if I have questions and can give appropriate credit.'''
##
## Also see ["madduck/adoptions"] for a list of tools which have or have not been
## adopted by developers of the Debian project. Feel free to extend/edit this
## list as well.
##
## I use the following categories for factors (please extend as you see fit):
##
## * [wiki:/usability Usability]: how usable is the tool? Is it well-documented?
## Can it be used in more than one way? Does it have multiple interfaces?
##
## * [wiki:/maintenance Maintenance status]: how well is the tool maintained?
## Does it distinguish between stable and unstable releases? Are unstable
## releases usable?
##
## * [wiki:/implementation Implementation] (developer aspects): how is a tool
## implemented? This is about code, language, style of development,
## modularity, accessibility to users interested in touching the code, etc.
##
## * [wiki:/direction Direction]: does the project follow a defined direction?
## Is there a manifesto? What happens with new ideas which may deviate a bit
## from a given direction?
##
## vim:com=b\:##:fo+=an

Factors affecting tool adoption in OSS

THIS IS OBSOLETE. PLEASE GO HERE: http://phd.martin-krafft.net/wiki/factors/