> (SNIP)
> >Companies:
> >
> >
> >Someone works in a company; they need a specific app/lib, which doesn't
> >exist. They can do it themselves, or propose a sponsored open source
> >project. (= the someone puts uploads a little page describing what's
> >needed, and links it on the Wiki). Benefits may be faster development
> >time, more testers/bugreporters => more stability, etc.
> >
>
> My experience is that most companies are not nearly 'enlightened' enough
> to even consider something like this.  At the company where I previously
> worked there were a couple of us open source advocates and on one
> occassion we proposed something like this (to develop a library).  The
> folks who were in charge just rolled their eyes and looked at us as
> though we had just proposed that we should have aliens from
> another galaxy
> work on our code...
>
> Now, I'm sure that there are more and more companies out there who are
> 'getting it' when it comes to open source, but currently they're
> still few
> and far between.
>
> Phil
>

As a former CTO, I can say that one way to convince your company's business
folks into doing this (open-source) is to let them know that MANY people
will then be able to use/debug/enhance/support your open-source library and
since that library is not CORE TO THE BUSINESS its better to open it up.
This "core to the business" stuff is a great weapon against business folks.
The investors/owners in most companies never want to (or shouldn't) work on
anything that is not core to the business.

It goes something like this:

I need this library of functionality to help us in our work to be the best
darned medical management software in existence.  I need to have a library
to lets me access Jabber.  It would be better if someone else had it done
and I could just pluck it off the selves, but its not there...so we have to
build it.  This Jabber library, itself, is too general to protect/achieve
differentiation on but it will help us be the best darned medical management
software in existence.  Hey, we built it, but only to the point where it
meets our needs.  You know, if we open it up for others to
use/debug/enhance/support so we can leverage off of them making that library
better, and we can focus on the use of it in things that are "core to the
business" (like the doctor's interface to an IM system)...yeah...sounds like
a good business decision.

-Rich