After some recent events, I've been wondering: "Should we contribute to OSS, but make these contributions voidable?" What I mean is should we write code for a project, donate it to that project, but make sure it can be taken out / stop use, if that project goes sour? Here's an extreme example:

Project X is formed and it's a great idea. You join up with Project X and make a few modifications and add some cool new features. Project X continues to grow and becomes really popular with millions of users, so you start listing yourself as connected with Project X. Finally, Project X's administrator, who you trusted to handle the project correctly, decides that the logo should be switched from a Teddy Bear to Ted Bundy and display a message about killing your family. There was no fork, there was only a modification to the project, a project that you've tied yourself to. So you of course cut your ties and do your best to explain you had nothing to do with that project, but what if you could say "stop promoting your project until you remove my ties / contributions to it?"

Unlike most OSS project where there is was a fork to the project before it went sour, here this is not the case. Here, we've got a project administrator who just decided to up and change course out of the blue and you're caught in the crossfire. The best you can do is drop all connections with the project and play clean up with your reputation, but is that right? You can fork the project, hoping that the users offended by the changes are willing to try your new product, but you've still been negatively impacted (reputation, lose of users, etc.). What if they jump to another alternative, because the "Project X" name has been tainted forever and when they see your application load, they're just waiting for Ted Bundy to pop up and tell them to kill their families so they just shut it down and uninstall it?

I know as OSS developers we allow our code to be used freely by others, but we assume that major changes will result in a fork. What happens when there is no fork and the administrator of the project just decides to switch coarse taking us with them? What can we do? I like to think most OSS developers have faith that people who start/maintain OSS projects are going to keep to their words and keep software free and/or at least follow the path. Should we take out insurance on our contributions, make contracts with the administrators ("you can use this until you sell us out") or should we just have blind faith that OSS will manage itself?

Right now, I'm at a loss. Do I plan to keep my faith in people to do what they promise or do I make sure I can stop them from adversely affecting me? Is open source going to get to the point where we need contracts with Administrators to keep their words and keep projects on track? Or should we stick to the old Fork and Rebuild ontology and hope that we can "cover" all the damage to our reputations without much hassle?

I just don't know,
Tyler

Just wanted to share a great experience I had today. I started volunteering with a group who helps monitor foster families. I went to visit a child and his family. The child has gone from a troubled past to making honor roll twice this year. He told me "I love my life."

I won't say anymore, except it's wonderful to hear something like that and actually see a system that we hear so much bad about working. Sure millions might get "wasted" a year, but that money has really helped this child out. Anyway, I know there are still a lot of horror stories out there and this is probably the "exception", but that's why I'm volunteering to make this the norm.

If you have the time you should really consider working with some kind of community group. I'm holding 2 jobs and attend law school fulltime and I've made time to help out. The only real difference I find from most people is I don't watch TV. If you are saying to yourself "I don't have time," make sure it isn't because you're watching "American Idol." I hope anyone reading this would have a hard time justifying that "American Idol" is more important than making sure that children in the foster system have their needs met and are in a safe home. It only takes a few hours a month, think about it.

Cheers,
Tyler