Open Source Royalty and Mad Kings  🔗 **Source:** [Open Source Royalty and Mad Kings](https://world.hey.com/dhh/open-source-royalty-and-mad-kings-a8f79d16) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: [#open-source, #wordpress, #acf, #wpeengine, #plugin-fork] > Author: David Heinemeier Hansson > Source: [Hey World](https://world.hey.com/dhh/open-source-royalty-and-mad-kings-a8f79d16) > Reference: [Open Source Royalty and Mad Kings](https://world.hey.com/dhh/open-source-royalty-and-mad-kings-a8f79d16) > date created: 2024-10-14 10:45 > > # Title: Open Source Royalty and Mad Kings > <!-- deep-read:sections start --> ## Table of Contents: - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-diversity-equity-inclusion-and-belonging-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🔍 SEO Evaluation](#-seo-evaluation) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) ## 📝 Summary: David Heinemeier Hansson critiques the power dynamics within open-source projects, using the conflict between WordPress and WP Engine as an example. He expresses concerns over the forced takeover of the Advanced Custom Fields (ACF) plugin by WordPress, calling it a dangerous precedent that could disrupt the stability of open-source ecosystems. ## 📖 Main Content: Hansson warns about the risks of governance shifts within open-source projects when dominant figures, like Matt Mullenweg, use their influence to enforce control. The ACF plugin's expropriation reflects deeper issues within the WordPress ecosystem, including tension over governance, control, and the risks of weaponizing community assets for commercial disputes. ### 🗒️ Notes: - **Governance Issues**: Hansson supports the Benevolent Dictator For Life (BDFL) model but warns it can go too far. - **ACF Conflict**: The ACF plugin takeover is linked to a legal dispute between Automattic and WP Engine. - **Community Risks**: Weaponizing open-source repositories could set a dangerous precedent. ## 📖 References: - [Hey World: Open Source Royalty and Mad Kings](https://world.hey.com/dhh/open-source-royalty-and-mad-kings-a8f79d16) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase: 1. Open-source governance benefits from decisive leaders, but unchecked power can harm the community, as seen in the ACF dispute. 2. Weaponizing plugin registries to resolve business disputes jeopardizes the neutrality of open-source platforms, a risk that could ripple across other ecosystems. ## 📰 Newsletter: **Open Source in Crisis?** In this week’s newsletter, we explore the fallout from WordPress taking over the ACF plugin, a decision that has raised alarms across the community. We discuss the balance between governance and control, recent WordPress updates, and new security tools for developers. Stay updated to keep your WordPress projects secure! ## ✅ Action Items: - **Open-Source Advocacy**: This article reinforces the need for transparent governance models—aligning with your advocacy efforts. - **Career Connection**: Understanding these power dynamics supports your goal of becoming an OSPO director, ensuring you foster inclusive ecosystems. ## 🧪 Hypotheses: - Centralized control over plugins could discourage community contributions. - Alternative governance frameworks could prevent similar conflicts in the future. ### 📊 Methodology: - **Case Study**: Compare governance disputes across different open-source ecosystems. - **Surveys**: Assess developer sentiment on WordPress’s governance. ### ❓ Questions: - How can open-source projects balance leadership with community input? - What safeguards can protect plugin repositories from misuse? ### 🔮 Future Research: - Investigate the impact of governance changes on plugin ecosystems. - Explore decentralized models for plugin management. ### 💡 Implications: Future governance reforms could lead to more sustainable open-source ecosystems by balancing power between maintainers and contributors. ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment: - **Visual Learners**: Provide a governance timeline. - **Logical Learners**: Include a detailed breakdown of decision-making models. ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment: - **Screen Reader Compatibility**: Ensure governance documentation is accessible. - **Keyboard Navigation**: Optimize admin interfaces for accessibility. ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment: - **Inclusiveness**: Encourage diverse perspectives in governance discussions. - **Psychological Safety**: Foster respectful debate within the community. ### ✅ Logical Validity: - **Strengths**: Hansson offers well-reasoned arguments about governance risks. - **Fallacies**: There’s some appeal to fear, warning of extreme outcomes if unchecked power continues. ### 🔍 SEO Evaluation: - **Keywords**: ACF plugin, WordPress governance, open-source disputes. - **Optimization**: Include internal links to governance discussions for better engagement. ## 🎯 Conclusion: Hansson’s analysis highlights critical issues surrounding power dynamics and governance in open-source projects, emphasizing the need for transparency to maintain trust within the community. <!-- deep-read:sections end --> 📄 **Full text:** ![[Full Document Contents/Articles/Open Source Royalty and Mad Kings|Open Source Royalty and Mad Kings, hey.com]] ## Highlights - Which will hijack then eulogize *The Will of The Community*, as though *that* somehow deserved the mandate from heaven. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01ja5n73a1f09dwnmwtskh726j)) - [Open source is not a democracy](https://world.hey.com/dhh/open-source-is-neither-a-community-nor-a-democracy-606abdab), and we all benefit from that fact, whether we accept it or not. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01ja5n7hb72ngm99zepprpz1br)) - Imagine this happening on npm? Imagine Meta getting into a legal dispute with Microsoft (the owners of GitHub, who in turn own npm), and Microsoft responding by directing GitHub to ban all Meta employees from accessing their repositories. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01ja5n89746cxr1jpmyfwee8va))