System and method for software development

• US 20030192029A1
• Filed: 04/07/2003
• Published: 10/09/2003
• Est. Priority Date: 04/08/2002
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: TopCoder, Inc. (Wipro Limited)
• Original Assignee: TopCoder, Inc. (Wipro Limited)
• Inventors: Hughes, John M.
• Granted Patent: US 7,292,990 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 717/101
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/20 Software design
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/70 Software maintenance or management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06311 Scheduling, planning or task assignment for a person or group
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/063112 Skill-based matching of a person or a group to a task
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/10 Office automation; Time management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/12 Accounting

Abstract

This invention relates to a method and apparatus for developing software. In one embodiment, a method for facilitating the distributed development of software components includes providing a skill rating for software developers, communicating specifications for a software component to a subset of the developers, receiving submissions from the developers, scoring the submissions, and selecting one submission to be included in a software repository. In another embodiment, a method for compensating a software developer includes soliciting software developers for the submission of computer software components, receiving software components in response to the solicitation from the developers, evaluating the received software components, selecting one or more of the submissions for potential distribution to the public, and allotting the proceeds from the distribution to the developers.

Claims

1. A method for facilitating the distributed development of software programs comprising:

(a) providing a skill rating for a plurality of developers;

(b) communicating specifications for a software program to a subset of the plurality of developers;

(c) receiving at least one submission in response to the communicated specifications;

(d) deriving a score for the at least one submission; and

(e) selecting one of the at least one submission for inclusion in a software repository based on its derived score.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein the rating is based on the results of a coding competition.

3. The method of claim 2 wherein the coding competition is an online coding competition.

4. The method of claim 1 wherein the rating is based on prior submissions of a design for a software program.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein the rating is based on prior submissions of a software program.

6. The method of claim 1 wherein the specifications are for the design of a software program.

7. The method of claim 1 wherein the specifications are for the development of a software program.

8. The method of claim 1 wherein the software program is a software component.

9. The method of claim 1 wherein the software program can be one or more of:

a software component, a software application, a combination of software components, or a software module.

10. The method of claim 1 wherein the subset of the plurality of developers is determined based on the skill ratings of the developers.

11. The method of claim 10 wherein the subset of the plurality of developers is determined based on which developers have a rating.

12. The method of claim 1 wherein the submission is a design for a software program.

13. The method of claim 1 wherein the submission is computer code for a software program.

14. The method of claim 1 wherein the developer is a software designer.

15. The method of claim 1 wherein the developer is a software programmer.

16. The method of claim 1 wherein the step of deriving a score for the at least one submission further includes reviewing the submission by a developer other than the developer who submitted the submission.

17. The method of claim 1 wherein the submission must receive a minimum score to be selected for inclusion into the software repository.

18. The method of claim 1 wherein submissions included in the software repository are certified to operate in computing environments different from the computing environment used for the original submission.

19. A method for compensating software developers comprising:

(a) soliciting a plurality of developers for submissions of computer software programs;

(b) receiving submissions from at least one of the plurality of developers;

(c) deriving a score for each of the submissions;

(d) selecting a subset of the submissions for inclusion in a repository for distribution to the public based on the scores assigned to the submissions;

(e) allotting a portion of the proceeds from the distribution of the at least one software program to at least one of the plurality of developers in response to the selected submission.

20. The method of claim 19 further comprising, prior to step a), rating the software developers.

21. The method of claim 20 wherein the software developers are rated based on their performance in an online coding competition.

22. The method of claim 20 wherein the software developers are rated based on prior submissions of a design for a software program.

23. The method of claim 20 wherein the software developers are rated based on prior submissions of a software program.

24. The method of claim 19 wherein the software program is a software component.

25. The method of claim 19 wherein the software program can be one or more of:

a software application, a combination of software components, or a software module.

26. The method of claim 19 wherein the developers are solicited based at least in part on their rating.

27. The method of claim 26 wherein the developers are solicited based on the developers having a rating.

28. The method of claim 19 wherein the step of selecting a subset of the submissions further includes identifying one submission as the winning submission.

29. The method of claim 19 wherein the proceeds are allotted at least in part based on the rating of the developers.

30. The method of claim 19 wherein the proceeds are allotted at least in part based on the number of hours the at least one of the plurality of developers spent coding the software program.

31. The method of claim 19 wherein the proceeds are allotted at least in part based on the number of times the software program is distributed.

32. A system for facilitating the distributed development of software programs comprising:

a rating engine for rating the skills of software developers;

a server for communicating specifications to a plurality of developers, the developers having been previously rated in a coding competition;

a receiving module for receiving software programs developed by the developers; and

a scoring module for evaluating the received software programs.

33. The system of claim 32 further comprising a reviewing module for allowing developers to review submissions submitted by other developers.

34. The system of claim 32 further comprising a repository for storing the evaluated software programs.

35. The system of claim 34 further comprising an online showroom for displaying the software programs stored in the repository.

36. The system of claim 34 further comprising sample applications built at least in part from the software programs stored in the repository.

37. The system of claim 34 further comprising a demonstration module for demonstrating the features of the software programs stored in the repository.

38. The system of claim 32 further comprising a calculation module for allocating revenue among a development team.

39. The system of claim 38 wherein the calculation module allots proceeds based at least in part on the rating of the developers.

40. The system of claim 38 wherein the calculation module allots proceeds based at least in part on the number of hours the at least one of the plurality of developers spent coding the software program.

41. The system of claim 38 wherein the calculation module allots proceeds based at least in part on the number of times the software component is distributed.