Subject: Re: Successful FSBs
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 15:00:13 +0900

>>>>> "Brian" == Brian Behlendorf <brian@collab.net> writes:

    Brian> So, anyone care to define 'FSB'?

A partial definition would be that FSB is an activity, not an
organization.  If work related to an FSB gets reported in the accounts
as an organizational unit (eg, department), that _department_ is an
FSB, whatever the whole business might be.

    Brian> It might also be interesting to index economic performance
    Brian> with the %age of developer time spent writing code that is
    Brian> given away, versus code that is kept in-house or sold only
    Brian> under a non-open-source license.

That would be a good measure of FSB-orientation.  As a sanity check,
also compute a conservative aggregation accounting unit level --- you
only get to count the hours as FSB if the whole unit qualifies.

That probably means that collab.net, ActiveState et al would be 0%,
since I bet you don't keep accounts that fine.  But for bigger
businesses that would be an important sanity check.


-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
 My nostalgia for Icon makes me forget about any of the bad things.  I don't
have much nostalgia for Perl, so its faults I remember.  Scott Gilbert c.l.py