@proceedings {1465,
	title = {Forking the Commons: Developmental Tensions and Evolutionary Patterns in Open Source Software},
	volume = {378},
	year = {2012},
	month = {09/2012},
	pages = {310-315},
	publisher = {IFIP AICT,  Springer},
	abstract = {Open source software (OSS) presents opportunities and challenges for developers to exploit its commons based licensing regime by creating specializations of a software technology to address plurality of goals and priorities. By {\textquoteleft}forking{\textquoteright} a new branch of development separate from the main project, development diverges into a path in order to relieve tensions related to specialization, which later encounters new tensions. In this study, we first classify forces and patterns within this divergence process. Such tensions may stem from a variety of sources including internal power conflicts, emergence of new environmental niches such as demand for specialized uses of same software, or differences along stability vs. development speed trade-off. We then present an evolutionary model which combines divergence options available to resolve tensions, and how further tensions emerge. In developing this model we attempt to define open software evolution at the level of systems of software, rather than at individual software project level.},
	keywords = {divergence, forking, software evolution, specialization},
	author = {Gen{\c c}er, Mehmet and {\"O}zel, B{\"u}lent}
}
@article {vanWendeldeJoode2005109,
	title = {Handling variety: the tension between adaptability and interoperability of open source software},
	journal = {Computer Standards \& Interfaces},
	volume = {28},
	number = {1},
	year = {2005},
	note = {unable to find concise description of the data used [ms]},
	pages = {109 - 121},
	abstract = {Open source software (OSS) offers unprecedented opportunities to create variety. This could lead to incompatibility and fragmentation. To prevent this some form of coordination is needed. This paper explores which mechanisms of coordination are responsible for limiting divergence in OSS. Two cases are examined: Java and Linux. A systematic difference seems to exist between the mechanisms identified in the two communities. With respect to Java, divergence is where possible avoided ex ante, whereas for Linux divergence is foremost reduced ex post. The conclusion discusses this difference and the implications of both types of coordination in respect to interoperability.},
	keywords = {coordination, divergence, java, linux},
	issn = {0920-5489},
	doi = {DOI: 10.1016/j.csi.2004.12.004},
	url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6TYV-4F6K72H-1/2/c74c64ce51e6f46abf9f39ae945c9e15},
	author = {Ruben van Wendel de Joode and Tineke M. Egyedi}
}
