L'” open-source “, but still ? For neophytes, this notion seems to be witchcraft. Yet releasing the computer code of a mobile app or website for developers to examine is hardly black magic. The provision of the source code pOften allows to reinforce the transparency on the goals sought, to reassure the users on the way in which the data are collected and used, and to improve sometimes artisanal projects.
One of the best known examples recently is the creation of CovidTracker by Guillaume Rozier in full containment. “It started with a citizens’ initiative, analyzes Aurélie Thomas, a 34-year-old web developer who contributed to this vast project. Guillaume Rozier had absolutely not thought of it as an app to potentially help people [avec l’extension « Vite ma dose » quelques mois plus tard] or to make money. From day 1, the code of CovidTracker was available in open-source, which allowed to see all its evolution. At the very beginning, the code was clearly not very qualitative. But Guillaume Rozier was transparent, explaining himself that although he was a computer science student at the time, he had used technologies he did not know. “With the success that we now know him.
For the past few weeks, the one that has crystallized the debates – in particular because it ended up playing an essential role in the presidential campaign – is the Elyze application. This “electoral Tinder” suffers from having taken a long time to make its code public in open-source. “Technically, it’s extremely fast”, explains Mathis Hammel, “Tech evangelist” at CodinGame and popularizer of the development world. “What can be time consuming, however, is ‘cleaning’ it up and choosing which files to include in theopen-source because it is not necessary to file them all. Sometimes developers leave passwords written in files or authentication credentials on databases. It is therefore necessary to ensure that the code can be published without disclosing sensitive data. For Elyze, there had to be chunks of code done in a hurry and its young creators didn’t want to be judged by the developer community. »
All the advantages of a collaborative project
And yet, as Aurélie Guillaume analyzes, the positive consequences ofopen-source are numerous: “The main advantage is the support of the community. Depending on the programming language used, this makes it possible to have feedback on the code so that it is more robust, more secure, that it uses the language development standards, that it can evolve. It’s really important for the quality of the code and for the suggested features that can bring great added value”.
In the case of Elyze, for example, “it was a question of algorithmic transparency,” adds Mathis Hammel. Indeed, with an application that tells you who to vote for and collects sensitive data, making its code freely available reinforces the reliability and confidence of users: “They had to show their credentials to reaffirm that they were neutral and partisan. However, with the appearance of the bug on the ties, where Emmanuel Macron always arrived first, they lost credibility, ”adds the developer.
The evolution of the practice open-source
Today, the community ofopen-source is increasingly important, even large companies – including Gafam – are getting into it. By greatness of soul? Not really, says Aurélie Guillaume. “For Google, for example, the interest during a period in which they were trying to impose Chrome as a browser, was to have their software adopted open-source by all developers. And by providing them with easy and free tools to develop, they will use them more easily, the site will display better on Google Chrome. It was a way of selling their products”.
On the other side of the chessboard, the majority of developers code on projects voluntarily what the web developer calls “free evangelism”. And then, she also puts forward the case of those who “become standards or references”. Among these heavyweights, we can find Firefox, a well-known browser, which has found a viable business model for theopen-source, which is often associated with precariousness because its contributors are mostly volunteers. “Firefox has created a foundation that employs full-time developers dedicated to making improvements to its own browser. They are employees of the Firefox Foundation, not the commercial part of Mozilla », explains Aurélie Guillaume.
The benevolence of the community or almost
” The community open-source, it’s 99% caring people who don’t seek to exploit problems but rather help and make improvements. exclaims Mathis Hammel. A point of view totally shared by Aurélie Guillaume. And yet, concerning Elyze, the community was sharp with regard to the two co-creators: “They made the mistake of not putting their code immediately in open-source. So the community’s first outcry. But upon publication, they were also lynched over major flaws. In my opinion, such reactions do not help the image of theopen-sourceit served the cause, ”analyzes Aurélie Guillaume.
Despite its reputation for being particularly benevolent, will the developer community finally get the better of it?open-source ? In the case of Elyze, “the whole world of software development turned to creators when they had no experience. So it’s a bit violent, ”recognizes Mathis Hammel. But the permanent development of free projects, as well as the contributions that they bring to the world of computer code suggests that they still have a bright future ahead of them. Striving towards an ideal where transparency and altruism would be the key words is still relevant: “CovidTracker is a fine example of the benevolence of the community open-source concludes Aurélie Guillaume.