In a very long article, The Register relates how Adobe learns lessons of open-source Flex
Matt Chotin, Flex senior product manager, said one hurdle is getting people in the community to back up ideas and suggestions for Flex with actual code submissions. [...] "There are plenty who say casually they want something but don't want to get an account," Chotin said. [...] "We have a very active Flex community...but getting people to the point where they aren't just sending an idea without anything backing it up is difficult - any idea is OK as long as there's code with it," Chotin said. "We are still trying to figure how to get the community and companies to say: 'This is an important change to make and I want to make this contribution,'" Chotin added.
Chotin conceded one thing Adobe could have done better before taking Flex open source was to research how other open-source projects work. This could have informed how the Flex project had been set up and helped improve the way things are being done.
So was it worth going open source? The majority of the costs Adobe has - and continues to incur - from taking Flex open source come in time - the number of people hours involved in working through submitted fixes, for example. Chotin claimed he could not put an actual dollar amount on the work.
Sorry to dissapoint you, Matt Chotin, but you're not doing that much wrong. Certainly, it's happening much like open source projects I know about. And the code review problem is the same problem the perl core has.
Given the way p5p treats some code submissions, I can proffer a somewhat different explanation.
