CIO choices: the open source option. 1. Supporting the team

Community is the big differentiator between proprietary and open source software

These days, rather than being compiled behind closed doors, business software is just as likely to be assembled from components that are freely available on the web.

The scale and pace of change of enterprise IT means there's no way that traditional software vendors can keep up in the way they once could, and open source has been filling many of the gaps. More than that though, open source options are increasingly the default choice, particularly in key areas like data processing and analytics.

So, all other things being equal, should CIOs choose proprietary software, with its well understood (if not always well liked) licensing policies, mature support networks and guarantees, or venture into what was once considered a sort of Wild West with its promise of increased speed and control and lower prices?

This is not always a simple choice. It's no longer a case of open source vendor vs proprietary vendor, as in many cases, such as IBM's purchase of Red Hat, the latter have subsumed the former and elsewhere alliances are the name of the game. Thanks to open APIs, connectors and cloud, open source software can work in conjunction with its proprietary counterparts and the way it's licensed may not be a primary consideration. Cloud hosting of open source projects by the hyperscalers has reduced the need for support, while at the same time coming between the direct relationship between producer and consumer.

The choice will certainly be heavily influenced by the status of internal development teams. Developers quickly see the benefits of the open source model whereas the rest of the organisation may be slower to come around to this point of view.

We asked three businesses who make a living from open source software, in one way or another, how they see the picture developing and what CIOs should look out for.

Choosing open source

When it was a minority player, those who selected open source over proprietary software were generally actively supportive of the open source philosophy: very broadly, that users should be free to modify and share code as they fit. But is this still the case or does the increasing prevalence of open source software mean it's now often seen simply as the most practical choice, and does that matter?

Blair Lyon, VP cloud experience at Linode, an IaaS provider based on open source technologies, said companies certainly recognise the benefits of open source and do make choices based on that fact, but are not particularly religious about it.

"CIOs see it as a way to reduce lock in and provide a set of infrastructure standards against which to develop applications. However, the thinking tends to stop at the tool or project level, rather than the wider approach."

Debates over what constitutes true open source have raged for decades and may seem rather academic, nevertheless the label does cover a wide spectrum of approaches, and not all of them may be aligned with CIOs' plans for operational agility.

Matt Yonkovit, chief experience officer at open source database specialist Percona, says that while open source software is easier than ever to consume, the subtle differences between competing models may be overlooked.

"The fact that you can get easy access to open source projects via the cloud, or from centralised container libraries, means that it is easier to feel that you are respecting the reasons for open source existing," he said. "The problem here is that it is easy to miss the nuances that exist around licensing open source and what happens in the cloud. This can lead to problems over time," Yonkovit said.

So, the picture is more complex than it might appear. Open source code may be licensed under terms that range from the liberal to the restrictive. Some projects are single-company owned, others have multiple stakeholders. Projects can be forked, with the new version taking the top talent with it and sometimes changing the licensing terms in the process. And cloud providers may exert a disproportionate influence over which projects succeed.

To reduce the possibility of their solution becoming ossified or taking a turn they do not approve of, all three interviewees independently emphasised the importance of users of open source software getting actively involved in its development.

The importance of community

What really makes open source different from proprietary software is the many contributors donate their time for free. This is generally driven by enlightened self-interest rather than altruism (although the latter is much in evidence too): to gain the maximum benefit from open source, organisations need to give something back.

"The challenge here is understanding the community that exists around open source projects that are important to your company. Supporting those projects - either through direct funding or providing developer time, or through buying services from companies that are involved in those communities - is necessary to keep them viable and growing," said Yonkovit.

Bryan Kirschner, vice president of strategy at data management firm DataStax, sees membership organisations such as the Apache Foundation, the Linux Foundation and CNCF as increasingly important in providing the stability and governance that open source projects need. Generally speaking, although representatives of very large interests may sit on the board, the decision-making process in these foundations is pretty flat.

"I would encourage CIOs to think about their projects from an open source perspective. Open source has to be driven by a foundation or steering committee that can guide the community and ensure that everyone benefits," he said. "We find that collaboration in a foundation works really well. Users, committers, enterprises, everybody gets a chance to interact."

Actively supporting the developers of the software they benefit from is particularly important for larger organisations who can use their clout to steer developments, said Lyon.

"The more that you invest here, the more insight and leverage you stand to gain as a company over your competition. With open source being how most companies build new applications, having that community mindset can get you insight faster, help you pick the right projects and be more successful."

With a few exceptions (e.g. databases and operating systems), CIOs will rarely be faced with a direct open source vs. proprietary choice as a deciding factor when procuring enterprise software: legacy systems and incumbent suppliers tend to occupy that role. But particularly for those with the wherewithal to support the developments they are using, open source software can be a real game changer allowing faster time to market, quicker bug fixes, attention to niche areas and probable cost savings too.

In the second part of this series we'll be looking at open source's role in reducing vendor lock-in - and how it can sometimes create silos of its own.