Fonts Pierre Huyghebaert, Belgica-Belgika, 2014 — OFL 1.1 http://scripts.sil.org/OFL Open Source Publishing, Manufactura Independente, PropCourierSans, 2015 — OFL 1.1 http://scripts.sil.org/OFL diff.jpg Colaboratorio de relatos, DIFF es la sustancia del cambio, 2013 — Donated to The Public Domain "In all this work, we're trying to find something poetical in digital practices. We think that they are transforming things, and that there's something artistic in them, because they're not just programs, they're ways of doing things. So with Ricardo, he gave us two hours and he explained how version control systems work, with just a paper and a pencil. And he explained it for people who don't know anything about version control, and it was incredible, because he could translate these concepts to us. We decided that Diff was really important to us. Then, we decided we could get something symbolic or something poetic out of everything. Difference is the most important thing for me, in version control, because the point is that: What is the difference, not which is the common. Because that would be the normal way of thinking." Femke Snelting, Interview with Carla Bosermans, 2013 — FAL IMG_0357.JPG Colaboratorio de relatos, Understanding Version Control with Git (2013) — Donated to The Public Domain "Accountability and credit are built into many of the technical tools that facilitate collaboration, such as CVS and Subversion—software systems used to manage shared source code. These systems give developers the ability to track (and potentially revert to) incremental changes to files and report the changes to a mailing list as they are made, and are often used concurrently by many developers. Since developers all have accounts, these technologies not only enable collaboration but also provide precise details of attribution. Over time, this record accumulates into a richly documented palimpsest. Though individual attribution is certainly accorded, these technological palimpsests reflect unmistakably that complicated pieces of software are held in place by a grand collaborative effort that far exceeds any one person’s contribution." Gabriela Coleman, Coding Freedom. The Ethics and Aesthetics of Hacking, Princeton University Press, 2012 difference-page002.png difference-page004.png difference-page005.png difference-page006.png Femke Snelting, From the longest common subsequence to a DIFF, 2015 — FAL http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en/ "The GNU project and the ensuing Free Software movement, encourage a practice of software development whereby code is released under a license that ensures that it remains not only freely usable, but also reworkable and redistributable by subsequent programmers. In 'freeing' the code, the GPL shifts value from the code to the surrounding practice. Stallman's early manifesto still includes a 'Don't Repeat Yourself' stance as one of the core 'benefits' of the project. '[The GNU project] means that much wasteful duplication of system programming effort will be avoided. This effort can go instead into advancing the state of the art.'" Michael Murtaugh, Do Not Repeat Yourself in: Olga Goriunova (ed.), Fun and Software: Exploring Pleasure, Paradox and Pain in Computing, Bloomsbury, 2014 git-migration-centralized-vs-distributed.png Atlassian Cloud services, Software to plan, collaborate, code, and service. Built for teams, 2014 bundesgit_intro.png Konstantin Käfer, Bundes-Git Octo Eagle, 2012 — CC0 https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ "Eric Shrijvers: On the one hand it's maybe a fan act. We like this movement of F/LOSS development which is not always given the importance it should in the cultural world. It's like saying _hey I find you culturally relevant and important_. But there's another side to it. It's not just a distant appropriation, it's also the fact that software development is such a pervasive force. It's so much shaping the world, that I feel I also want to take part in defining what are these procedures, what are these ways of sharing, what are these ways of doing things." "Ludivine Loiseau: And from another side, in the world of graphic design it is also a way to affirm that we are different. And that we're really engaged in doing this and not only about designing nice pictures. That we really develop our own tools. It is a way to say: hey, we're not a kind of politically engaged designers with a different political goal each next half month, and than we do a project about it. It really impacts our ecosystem, we're serious about it." Femke Snelting, Distributed Versioning Control: Interview with Open Source Publishing, 2014 — FAL http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en/ debianubuntu.png Andreas Lundqvist, GNU/Linux Distribution Timeline 11.4, 2011 — GNU Free Documentation License http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html "Forking is considered a Bad Thing — not merely because it implies a lot of wasted effort in the future, but because forks tend to be accompanied by a great deal of strife and acrimony between the successor groups over issues of legitimacy, succession, and design direction. There is serious social pressure against forking." Eric Raymond, The on-line hacker Jargon File, version 4.4.7 http://www.catb.org/jargon/index.html "So this whole commit access issue, which some companies are able to ignore by just giving everybody commit access, is a huge psychological barrier and causes endless hours of politics in most open source projects. If you have a distributed model, it goes away. Everybody has commit access, you can do whatever you want to your project. You just get your own branch, you do great work or you do stupid work, nobody cares, it’s your copy. It’s your branch. And later on if it turns out that you did a good job, you can tell people, “hey here is my branch, and by the way it performs 10x faster than anybody else’s branch, so nyah nyah nyah, how about pulling from me?” And people do. And that’s actually how it works, and we never have any politics, that’s not quite true – we have other politics, but we do not have to worry about 'commit access' thing." Linus Torvalds, Tech Talk: Linus Torvalds on git, 2007 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 "Free Software is a public of a particular kind: a recursive public. Recursive publics are publics concerned with the ability to build, control, modify, and maintain the infrastructure that allows them to come into being in the first place and which, in turn, constitutes their everyday practical commitments and the identities of the participants as creative and autonomous individuals." Chris Kelty, Two bits, The Culture of Free Software, Duke University Press, 2008 "The disruptive force of forking is greater in an environment whose default is to maintain code in centralized, collaboratively maintained repositories such as Subversion. Entry and exit in the project implicate both a division of participants and the need to erect new infrastructural support. The popularization of distributed version control systems such as GIT, Bazaar and Mercurial is changing this default (...), and creating more situations where the autonomous development of code, and the possibility of its repeated collaborative merging are rendered more explicit. (...) One could say that the future is one where the fork, a separated initiative, is the basic state, always awaiting its moment of reintegration." Adam Hyde, kanarinka, Mike Linksvayer, Michael Mandiberg, Marta Peirano, Sissu Tarka, Astra Taylor, Alan Toner, Mushon Zer-Aviv, Collaborative Futures, FLOSS Manuals, 2010 — CC BY-SA 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ 3millionusers.png Fox Business features GitHub with Tom Preston-Werner, screenshot, Fox News, 2013 star.jpg Fork me! GitHub interface detail, screenshot, 2015 "Sending changes back to the other code repository is purely optional, it depends on the willingness to interact with other developers and the willingness of these to accept changes. So indeed as 'forking' became so cheap, litteraly producing new projects and potentially new communities on demand, 'merging' and collaborating become extremely tedious, and reducing once and for all the whole delicate notion of consent and consensus in Free Culture, to the calculative mechanics of game theory. So you can forget approval, you can forget about engaging with the project, forget about basically all the collective and cooperative mechanisms that grew as part of the early years of the Free Software universe, even despite it's ties with the Free Market ideology ... you can just fork them all. And it works!" Aymeric Mansoux, Fork Workers in: Are You Being Served, Constant, 2015 Excerpt_from_Rainer_Variations_by_Charles_Atlas_2002.mp4 Charles Atlas, Excerpt from Rainer Variations (includes rehearsal images from Continuous Project Altered Daily by Yvonne Rainer), 2 min. 52 sec. excerpt from 41 min. 30 sec. original, 2002 "How to counter the very sterilization of collective forms of experience, as well as the general tendency of a self isolation that weighs on our present? How to invent ways of being together, while imagining a cooperation of intelligences? Which situation is to be achieved, so that the equality of everyone and anyone could be verified, and give way to the invention of an unpredictable common? How to reassess 'alteration' and 'difference' as a motor allowing for identification?" From description of 2013 remake by Xavier Leroy of Continuous Project Altered Daily diff.jpg Colaboratorio de relatos, DIFF es la sustancia del cambio, 2013 — Donated to The Public Domain