in reply to OT: Going Open Source

I've had some trouble justifying the publication of File::Tail to my boss. He was worried I'd spend too much time supporting the users of the module, and not enough working on company's other projects. I convinced him that other users would mostly send patches that would improve functionality. (Which as it turns out, wasn't exactly true)

I've had much better luck when we needed specific functionality from Proc::ProcessTable. The module's behaviour on Freebsd significantly differed from the behaviour on Solaris/Linux, and we needed it on all three. A collegue wrote a patch, and the boss immediately okayed sending that patch to the maintainer. Naturaly, since otherwise we'd have to apply that patch each time a new version came out. (Not to mention losing the easy CPAN instalation).

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: OT: Going OS
by Anonymous Monk on Apr 28, 2004 at 20:34 UTC
    So do you spend company time improving the module, or did you "adopt" it personally? What was the original plan, and how did it turn out?

    I have seen very few modules that are "backed" officially by a company. Are there any good examples of that out there? Other than Fotango I mean :)

      I adopted File::Tail personally, but I'm allowed to do some work on it on company time (because we use it for company purposes).

      As for Proc::ProcessTable the patch was developed on company time, but I don't think my collegue is going to adopt the FreeBSD branch.