Before this project, I understood open-source software mostly in technical terms — code that’s free to use, view, and change. Through this course, I began to understand what makes collaboration work — and why open-source projects, when governed with care, can be more inclusive, ethical, and sustainable than their closed-source counterparts.
Open Source vs. Public Domain
One of the first distinctions I learned was between open source and public domain.
- Open Source, defined by the Open Source Initiative, refers to software that is freely available, with the condition that any modifications or redistribution must preserve its openness. It’s a legal and ethical commitment to transparency and collaboration.
- Public Domain, by contrast, removes all restrictions. Anyone can use or change the code without attribution or sharing changes.
NVDA is licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL), which ensures that the software remains free and open. This influenced how I approached my work: I wasn’t just “using” their code — I was participating in a shared effort to make digital accessibility more equitable.
Governance Models in Open Source
Case studies in open-source governance helped me understand how decisions are made, who leads, and how conflict is handled. Three key models stood out:
- BDFL (Benevolent Dictator for Life): One leader makes final decisions, often the original creator (e.g. Linus Torvalds for Linux).
- Meritocracy: Contributors earn influence based on their work and involvement (e.g. Apache Software Foundation).
- Consensus-Based Governance: Decisions are made collectively, often through voting or discussion.
NVDA appears to follow a hybrid of meritocracy and consensus. While the core maintainers guide the vision and approve changes, I found that community feedback carries real weight. My pull request on improving the Settings dialog went through thoughtful review, including suggestions from experienced contributors and even accessibility advocates — showing that collaboration isn’t just vertical, it’s lateral too.
Contributing Guidelines: Structure for Collaboration
Studying different projects taught me that good open source doesn’t just welcome contributions — it guides them.
NVDA’s Contributing Guidelines were essential in helping me understand:
- How to set up the development environment
- Where to look for beginner-friendly issues
- What information to include in pull requests
- How to test changes for screen reader users
I realised that guidelines aren’t just bureaucracy. They’re an onboarding tool, a way of saying “you’re welcome here — and here’s how to contribute effectively.” It empowered me to participate even though I was new.
Code of Conduct: Building a Respectful Community
Another feature that shaped my experience was NVDA’s Code of Conduct. Inspired by the Contributor Covenant, it outlines expectations for respectful interaction and a harassment-free environment for everyone.
In study cases, I saw how codes of conduct can transform open-source spaces. Without them, talented people — especially those from underrepresented backgrounds — can be pushed out by toxic behavior. With them, diversity and safety become core values, not just side effects.
Knowing that NVDA upheld these principles made me feel safer asking questions, suggesting changes, and receiving critique. It reminded me that collaboration is emotional as well as technical.
Final Reflections
My contribution to NVDA was shaped by more than just reading the code. It was inspired by the broader philosophy of openness, by lessons from governance models and cultural frameworks that make FLOSS sustainable and fair.
Open-source collaboration isn’t just about what’s allowed — it’s about what’s encouraged, and how. It’s about making space for new voices, documenting your path for others to follow, and participating in a living, breathing ecosystem of shared care.
And in accessibility work especially, that kind of collaboration isn’t just nice — it’s necessary.
Leave a Reply