Project ontology

My dream is to work on ambitious projects with 2-20 core contributors over 1-100 months per project. When the project is complete and stable and beautiful, all of us stop working on it and move onto different projects. If built on a small/stable/well-defined platform/VM, it should work indefinitely (like Mario Kart 64). And then we celebrate our launch together and say goodbye or maybe do another project together and adopt some starry-eyed junior engineers and we all learn together and life is good. — Taylor Troesch, “Finishing Projects Together” (2023)

When we consider projects not as a universal phenomenon, but as a historically specific social form, what other kinds of analysis become possible? — Andrew Graan, “What was the project? Thoughts on genre and the project form” (2022)

Core definition of the project: ‘a recognizable style of purposive action that tethers genres of logistical planning and management to visions of the world made somehow different.’ (Graan 2022: 736)

Combining two core aspects: ‘logistical practical reasoning and visionary aspirational ends.’ (ibid.)

Here, a project is not just a task but a narrative arc with a defined beginning, middle (execution), and end (completion). Eeach project has its own plot, characters (contributors), and themes (goals or outcomes).

Choosing to “de-projectify” some undertakings? (as side-missions, or otherwise)

Overemphasising “projects” might reduce diverse practices and activities to structured processes and measurable outcomes. A homogenising force?

Projects imply a beginning and an end, which can constrain or marginalise activities that are recurring or cyclical in nature. This could devalue, e.g., maintenance efforts that are crucial but less visible.

• [?] What does it mean to look at the project as a genre?
• [?] How do we define the boundaries of a project? Is it limited to formal, structured endeavors, or can it include informal, ad-hoc initiatives?

Backlinks

: About : Side-missions