34 ms·

The Impact Github is Having on Your Software Career

382 points by kumaranvpl 10y ago

projektir 10y ago
This way of looking at things is so corruptive. Does everything we do have to be about reputation? About our CV and how we're hired? About competition? How many commits does it take to compensate for that state of mind, for what it does to people? Whenever you bring those things, they only leave a scorched plain in their wake and the community is forced to move somewhere else. > One of the principles of open source is meritocracy — the best idea wins, the most commits wins, the most passing tests wins, the best implementation wins, etc. Have we learned nothing? "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure." - Goodhart's law
- brightball 10y ago
  I haven't heard that before, but that is a great quote.
  - happy-go-lucky 10y ago
    Closely related ideas: "The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor." - Campbell's law (1976) "It is naive to try to predict the effects of a change in economic policy entirely on the basis of relationships observed in historical data, especially highly aggregated historical data." - Lucas critique (1976)
    - drivers99 10y ago
      Sounds like perverse incentives[1] in general. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverse_incentive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverse_incentive
      - happy-go-lucky 10y ago
        > In Hanoi, under French colonial rule, a program paying people a bounty for each rat tail handed in was intended to exterminate rats. Instead, it led to the farming of rats. LOL. Thank you.
        zardo 10y ago
        http://e360.yale.edu/features/perverse_co2_payments_send_flood_of_money_to_china http://e360.yale.edu/features/perverse_co2_payments_send_flo... A modern incarnation: High incentives for the destruction of a harmful chemical stimulates it's production.
        morgante 10y ago
        France is hardly the only colonizer to experience the problems of perverse incentives: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  "The most commits wins" and "the most passing tests wins" are pretty disturbing sentiments. That's not a way to write good code, it's a way to take on low-effort tasks for commit count or write 10,000 happy-path unit tests. "Best idea" and "best implementation" are fine, but that's because they're subjective. Goodhart's Law is a great thing to reference here - the only thing you can't game is "actually producing good outcomes".
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
ENOTTY 10y ago
Disagree totally. There are gazillions of software developers quietly plugging away at gigantic companies with over 50k headcount whose contributions will never make it into open source. Think business intelligence software, accounting software, embedded systems developers, etc.
- TurboHaskal 10y ago
  It is still having impact, but in a negative way. Being rejected as a candidate because of a lacking Github profile is not unheard of.
  - di4na 10y ago
    i can chip in. I was rejected at least a couple time because of that.
  - woah 10y ago
    Is it worse than being rejected as a candidate for not having crammed on algorithm mind teasers before the interview?
    - solumos 10y ago
      Probably. I imagine it's on the same level as having the right combination of buzzwords on your resume - you're unlikely to make it to the brain teaser round without it.
  - ryandrake 10y ago
    I wouldn't sweat it. Employers have been rejecting great tech candidates for dumb reasons for decades. I'd argue that if someone won't hire you because you don't have an account on some Internet service, you probably dodged a bullet and would not have wanted to work there in the first place.
    - endless1234 10y ago
      Though of course it can't /hurt/ to have a kick-ass Github profile, but I also doubt we'd be at a stage where it'd be required to get a job in the industry easily.
thehardsphere 10y ago
> Eventually a vast majority will be working in the open, and it will again be a level playing field differentiated on other factors. Haven't people been saying this for like, 10 years now?
prh8 10y ago
This almost seems like more of a hype article for Github than reality. It's certainly an extreme version of some truths (good and bad), but this is not how things are going to become for developers, certainly not as soon as 2018-2019.
isometric8 10y ago
I saw the reality of this on a job posting the other day, the recruiter wrote that applicants with github work will be given preference. This is pretty stupid really, a lot of really good developers are working on projects that cannot be shared or discussed or open sourced. Just because you haven't had the time between 1am and 3am to contribute to an open source project doesn't mean you suck as a developer.
- tobiaslins 10y ago
  You don't need to make your source public. Just check it in as private repository and your contribution graph is going to be filled. Some recruiter can now see that you work a lot - probably also on weekends and so on. A good looking github contribution graph looks kind of professional, also if you have starred some repositorys (which probably means you are active and love what you are doing)
  - RodericDay 10y ago
    > Some recruiter can now see that you work a lot - probably also on weekends and so on. WTF how is this a good thing?
    - tobiaslins 10y ago
      A developer who loves his job/hobby also codes in his free time (because it is also a hobby) Of course, if being a develoepr is only a "job" - this sucks. For example, I am coding 8h+ a day during my fulltime job. When I am back at home/weekends, I also spend a lot of my time to code private projects instead of playing games
      - ghaff 10y ago
        What complete BS. Someone can certainly enjoy their job--and software development is certainly nothing special--without also wanting to spend their nights and weekends doing the same thing. For that matter, I'd probably take such a narrow set of interests as something of a disqualification.
samuli 10y ago
At least in Finland (don't know about the rest of Europe) the information must be collected from the applicant and not by doing internet searches [0]. If a company wants to use any other sources, they must ask the applicants permission first. [0] http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/2004/20040759 http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/2004/20040759
neoeldex 10y ago
A self proclaimed "Legendary recruiter" Kssshh
- diimdeep 10y ago
  He likes to exaggerate http://www.thebesttechpodcastintheworld.com/ http://www.thebesttechpodcastintheworld.com/
  - sitapati 10y ago
    Don't forget this gem: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/04/17/job_ad_promises_meaningless_repetitive_work_on_the_net_stack/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/04/17/job_ad_promises_mea...
topbagsvk 10y ago
This is not how things are going to become for developers - http://www.topbagswatches.com/patek-philippe.html http://www.topbagswatches.com/patek-philippe.html
Asooka 10y ago
> Smart people will take advantage of this — they’ll contribute patches, issues, and comments upstream to the languages and frameworks that they use on the daily in their job — TypeScript, .NET, Redux. Yeah except for the tiny niggle that an overwhelming majority of contracts stipulate that you can't actually contribute to OSS either on or off the job due to the fact that every single thing you think of while employed (and sometimes for a period after your employment ends) belongs fully to your employer.
- jobigoud 10y ago
  I still can't understand how this doesn't fall into the abusive clause group.
dajohnson89 10y ago
Towards this end, is there a place that matches developers with small projects needing just a small amount of help? Say, a few small bug fixes or enhancements? I'd be happy to contribute but I don't want to commit too much of my time nor do I want to navigate the maze of a larger project.
cableshaft 10y ago
I think this guy feels this will be true because that's the bubble he lives in (an open source bubble). His bubble is not reflective of the entire software development community, however. Sure, it'd be nice if everything I worked on was available open source, but let's just look at one example where that's not a good idea: video games. Good luck getting the game industry to make their AAA games open source, especially before release, when hundreds of people are chomping at the bit to have a dirt easy time of cloning whatever game out there and tossing it on the app stores to make a few bucks off their broken, half-stolen mess of a game. It's a rampant problem right now (for example, 2048 and Flappy Bird both had open source versions, possibly unofficial... look how many clones of those games hit the app stores). Not to mention, game development often is a creative one where features are tried and then have to be cut for time, while audiences assume that anything they see will be in the final game, and if not they were maliciously lied to. This leads to any information about the game being closely guarded except for planned waaay in advance marketing campaigns, for most games (indies is a little different, indies need whatever exposure they can get usually). So no, not everyone is going to be working on open source software, and that's not going to change in the 2 year 'Mark my words!' timeline this guy has provided.
- vvanders 10y ago
  Yup, perfect example. Ironically game development is one if the areas where tech & algo is discussed widely and openly(which is what GDC used to be before it became a bit more commercialized). Most studios are happy to share their latest pathfinding/ai/rendering techniques which is almost always held close to the chest in other industries.
  - sevensor 10y ago
    Even more perfect because 2048 was the open-source clone, and we're not even mentioning Threes, the game on which it was based.
    - macintux 10y ago
      Yeah, I've always been annoyed at the lack of recognition Threes tends to get.
joshstrange 10y ago
> Previously privileged developers will suddenly find their network disrupted. Good god.... I love GitHub and what it allows for but let's not paint this as the "commoners" knocking down the walls that protect the "elites" in their ivory castles. Commiting to GitHub does not, on it's own, make you a better developer or a better person. In the same way that not committing to GitHub does not, on it's own, make you worse developer or a worse person. I've met people who don't have single commit to a public GitHub repo that are FAR better developers (and people in some cases) than ones I've know that are deeply ingrained in a public project. In some, not all, cases there are different skillsets required for OS work vs working at a "closed source" company. And while we are on that subject I'm quite sick of some of the attitudes I see on HN sometimes around "closed source" like it's some evil thing. It's not, people have to eat, have to pay rent, have to support their families and anyone that thinks you can do easily that while working for a for-profit company are living in a dream world. How many times have we seen posts here about how little money is actually given to OS? Sure I'd love to be able to only work on OS or work for a company that is open but there are very few success stories in that area. The cognitive dissidence the HN crowd expels when they fawn over the SasS companies or various other SV unicorns (all closed source) here and then derides closed source is astounding. All of this to say the message of "Your GitHub profile will mean everything for your career" is simply bullshit. CAN it give you a leg up? Of course, but experience working for a company and in that kind of setting is much more valuable to the vast majority of companies. Take a look at Linus Torvalds, undoubtedly a genius and a person who has done immense good for the OS community, however his temper/attitude are legendary with HN periodically posting links to his smack downs on mailing lists or the like. That said do you think many companies are looking for that kind of an employee? I think not (No disrespect meant to him at all, it works for him and I doubt he is looking for a job at those kind of places anyways). Most of the companies I've worked for or interviewed with have either not cared at all about my GitHub profile or even if they say they do care they don't give it more than a passing glance at best. Focus on being good at what you do and if that happens in public on GitHub/GitLab/etc then all the better but don't bend over backwards to make your profile look good at the expense of actually knowing your shit.
- uiri 10y ago
  I'm quite sick of some of the attitudes I see on HN sometimes around "closed source" like it's some evil thing. Proprietary software generally leaves society worse off than if that same software were free and open source. In that sense, it is some evil thing. It's not, people have to eat, have to pay rent, have to support their families There are plenty of people who think of stripping, porn and prostitution as some evil thing. The argument that strippers, porn actors/actresses and prostitutes need to eat, pay rent, etc. does not detract from that. However, I do not think that there should be laws against porn nor against proprietary software. I do agree with you that it is much easier to find a job doing proprietary software development. I would be a hypocrite if I suggested that people should not take those jobs. Companies will fund open source if and only if it furthers their business objectives. You are correct in saying that open source projects are, in general, woefully underfunded and the open source company success stories are few and far between. I would like to think that the "closed source software is evil" crowd is mutually exclusive to the "fawning over SV unicorn" crowd. Focus on being good at what you do and if that happens in public on GitHub/GitLab/etc then all the better but don't bend over backwards to make your profile look good at the expense of actually knowing your shit. I agree. If you happen to do good work on GitHub, it can give you a leg up. Any effort poured into making one's profile "look good" is probably better spent actually doing good work or, failing that, studying for those silly data structures & algorithms whiteboard questions.
pyb 10y ago
That chestnut is getting a bit old now. For those of us who do have open source code on Github, the consensus is clear : despite the hype, most employers don't really look at Github in any depth. They mostly prefer to grill candidates, rather than look at what they've actually done. I guess it must be more enjoyable.
- phkahler 10y ago
  >> They mostly prefer to grill candidates, rather than look at what they've actually done. When I interview people I like to grill them on what they've actually done. All evidence you may find on a CV or on github is secondary to what they can actually speak to. That's my opinion of course, everyone has their way of finding good people.
nappy-doo 10y ago
Would you like to be judged by the number of lines of code you submit? It's not much different than being judged by your commit graph on GitHub. If we judge ourselves, and others by this ridiculous metric, we're cheapening our profession. We are knowledge workers. We work by thinking and acting. A graph captures none of the first. The most valuable code I've ever written for an employer was about 100 lines that took 2 weeks to write. Would the commit graph capture that? I have gotten into arguments with my boss about hiring based on commit graphs and commit counts. I lost. We hired someone who checks in a lot of stuff, but often has to fix it with other changes. His graph and change count looks great. It's a nightmare working with him. In my experience, commit graphs are bogus.
KiwiCoder 10y ago
I do a lot of recruiting, for both paid and volunteer coding roles. I've been hiring for about 13 years, and I've been coding professionally for about 25 years. Before that I coded as a hobby, from about age 11. Speaking from this experience, and as someone who reviews on average 20-50 coder profiles a week, the public commit history of a coder is almost never a significant factor. I don't see any trends that indicate this is changing, either. The vast majority just don't have much to show, having spent their years working behind walls on closed software. Instead of relying on a public portfolio that in most cases won't exist, I rely on talking to these people directly, programmer to programmer. If we can code together, on the actual code they would be working on, that's about as good as it gets. In other words, I rely on my experience as a coder to help make what are, ultimately, subjective judgement calls.
- sotojuan 10y ago
  I can confirm from the employee side. I've worked with 40-60 people total that I at least sort of remember. Sure, that's not many people and I'm still new to the industry, but I can tell you that of all of these people only one or two have significant public GitHub activity. All the rest have empty GitHub accounts (aside from work). These are all well employed programmers at startups. They're doing fine. The importance of "side projects" is overrated on the internet.
  - cmrdporcupine 10y ago
    I used to be more into having side projects, and I continue to play with things, but due to employee IP contracts it's not really feasible to release them. My employer owns my brain, and while they can give permission to release things here and there, there are restrictions and processes to go through, and it really inhibits spontaneous contributions. And I work at a major tech BigCo(tm), with a lot of smart software engineers, the majority of which are under similar restrictions. Frankly, any potential employer who expected to see said contributions from me and use it to judge me or my coworkers as candidates would be making a poor decision.
    - 10y ago
donretag 10y ago
“All the work you do here will be in the open. In the future you won’t have a CV — people will just Google you.” Interviewer: I see you have a impressive profile on Github, but can you write an algorithm for quick sort on the whiteboard?
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  There should be a rule that any formulation of "In the future, you won't... You'll just..." is guaranteed to be wrong. It's right up there with predicting that no one will ever need ${product}, or writing news headlines with yes/no questions.
- kbart 10y ago
  Actually, as a security and privacy advocate, I'm proud that you will get exactly 0 results (not counting person of the same name) entering my real name to Google search and I'm actively keeping it that way.
Nekorosu 10y ago
The opinion represented in the article is based on top of several false assumptions. 1. GitHub represents the major part of software development world. No. It's a tip of an iceberg. I don't think I have to elaborate this one. 2. Open source software development model is an absolute winner. No. It's just one model of development which fits some kinds of projects better than the others. Companies tend to open-source tools. Product's code is usually closed source. Obviously there are a lot of developers who spend most of their time on closed source projects. Some of them also have life. 3. Your open source projects contribution helps recruiters to evaluate you performance for any kind of software development project. Not true. A lot of jobs are either legacy projects work, niche technologies work or both. Some niche technologies are closed source. Some legacy technologies predate open-source culture. The problems you face doing open source projects are very different from those you face doing b2b, b2c projects. Having said that the author's opinion looks invalid to me.
jurassic 10y ago
I recently read a novel called "A Fine Balance" by Rohinton Mistry. One character, Ashraf Chacha, is a man who works as a tailor. He is extremely grieved by the death of his wife. He talks about how when she was alive it never bothered him to spend all of his time reading or sewing - just knowing she was there in another room was enough. But after she dies, he regrets all the time he foolishly spent away from her. I don't want to look back on my life with that feeling. As adults, we have very little free time and spending it on software seems like a gross misallocation of resources, even if our careers would benefit. There's more to life than work.
- justinator 10y ago
  A Fine Balance is an absolute masterpiece of a book. There's many lessons to be learned from it.
- ryandrake 10y ago
  I used to agree with that, but competition for employment has gotten so cut-throat that when you spend time not being productive, not learning, not building your network, not adding to your resume, you can be assured that your competition (people wanting your job or the job you also want) ARE doing these things. Thanks to AI and robotics, we can expect things to get more and more cut-throat as time goes on. When you're out of work and a few months from insolvency, you're not looking back and saying "Man I wish I spent more time slacking off with my friends and family".
  - tonyedgecombe 10y ago
    When I look around me I don't see that much competition, rather endless mediocrity punctuated with occasional sparks of competence. If I was out of work I would be leaning on my friends and family for moral and even practical support. Doing nothing but work is a waste of a life.
    - TheOneTrueKyle 10y ago
      Sounds like you have a great life and great network of people around you so maybe telling someone what they love is a waste of life is probably not a good use of your life. Maybe realize that some people struggle to find happiness and will constantly be struggling. Not everybody can have a family. Not everyone can find a job after school. Not everything is easy. Maybe keep that in mind.
doodpants 10y ago
15 years ago, you went to Freshmeat or SourceForge to find open source projects. Now it's Github. In 5-10 years, a different open source repository might be more popular. The author seems unconcerned about a particular company having so much control. Note that he compares not having a Github account to not having email or a cellphone in general, rather than to not having e.g. Gmail or an iPhone in particular, which would be a more apt analogy. It's a disheartening reminder of the trend of the internet moving away from decentralized protocols to centralized services.
peteretep 10y ago
> Over the next 12–24 months > — in other words, between > 2018 and 2019 — how software > developers are hired is > going to change radically. Just in time for Linux on the desktop
mdekkers 10y ago
For software developers coming from a primarily closed source background, it’s not really clear yet what just happened. To them, open source equals “working for free in your spare time”. I'm guessing that would > 80% of all software developed globally?
whack 10y ago
I have to say that this post was inspiring to read. It's everything that software developers had dreamed of and idealized. Owning your own career. Building your own brand. Doing your work in the open. Your career progress being decentralized and determined by the trust you've built in your network of colleagues, and not by some pointy haired business guy. Unfortunately, I don't think any of the above is realistically going to happen at any point in the next 10 years. The majority of paid-for-code is proprietary, meaning that your 9-5 work-product can never be "googled" by outsiders. As a consequence of this, recruiters and hiring managers will continue to treat open-source work as second-class-indicators, behind your resume, CV and references. It's going to take a major paradigm shift in engineering/business culture, before any of this changes. That said, the author might be wrong about the timeframe, but he does paint a noble vision for the future. One that I'm sure future generations will be working in, and one that I hope I can experience one day.
KirinDave 10y ago
I think that looking at a GitHub profile is tricky. Very few people get to work on open source projects. And quite frankly, Linux's model of "trying to get noticed by the admins" doesn't scale well at all. There is a lot more to it than he's suggesting. If you want to interview people effectively try this crazy formula: 0. Ask for a remote tech screen. Ask for a simple piece of work that you can evaluate and that resembles real work. Make sure it can be built and tested imperially (the best way is automatically). This should be simple and not 8 hours of work. Don't ask people to code on a whiteboard or do their best algorithmic design in a high stress interview session, you won't get it. 1. Be prepared. Know what you're interviewing for and list out he skills. Read a candidates resume and review the prior work they offer. Read their code first. 2. Code review their tech screen. 3. Make sure to ask questions about their approach to work, leadership and projects. Encourage them to ask you similar questions. 4. Have a broad cross section of your company interview. Mix up who does this, diversity is a plus here. Also, make sure designers and HR folks get a bit of time, not just engineers. 5. If the position is senior tech, whitebiarding is acceptable for architecture or planning or diagrams.
jstewartmobile 10y ago
This article is a kind of half-truth. Sure, RedHat may reach out to you if you're consistently providing value, though that's probably the exception. Look at how much OpenBSD code gets used in highly profitable commercial products, then compare it to the level of donations they get from the same companies...
pselbert 10y ago
I find it difficult to imagine doing extensive web work (Rails, Django, PHP, JS) without ever touching GitHub. Surely, in the course of your daily work using giant open source projects you'll file a bug, comment on an issue or even submit a pull request. Most large applications are built off of dozens, or hundreds, of open source libraries—all of which have bugs at various times. I don't expect all web developers to have side-projects or libraries, but I would expect they'll interact with open source projects in some way. This way of thinking clearly doesn't apply in more closed source worlds like games, finance or giant enterprise—but it certainly holds for startup/web work in my experience.
- harpastum 10y ago
  It would be awesome if that was something everyone was able to do, but often company policy makes it really hard. I've worked at multiple companies where the red tape involved in having my contribution merged into a public repo was such a pain that it just wasn't worth it.
- QuantumGravy 10y ago
  My day job involves extensive web work. I've found plenty I could contribute, but I'm at an oldschool corp. that just isn't going to approve open source contributions on company time, using company resources and source code. On the flip side, they also don't care what I program outside work. It's just that my personal projects aren't web related and don't lend themselves to being open sourced.
steven777400 10y ago
A decade ago when I was teaching computer programming full time at the community college, I told my students that their online portfolio would be the most important thing to differentiate them from their classmates. I'm actually slightly less sure of this today... It's probably true for startups/"tech" companies; but many, many programmers work LOB in non-tech companies and I haven't heard/seen much that the hiring process has changed. If anything, we've come closer to the consensus that a small "work sample" is the best possible kind of interview - show up, here's a laptop and a small CR or project, implement. This has the advantage of being do-able remotely too, of course. Pull requests back to languages and frameworks works if you're at the skill level and motivation to work at the framework level (e.g. Google, Facebook, Microsoft; the companies making the mainstream frameworks). But it's a dis-service to ignore many, many programmers working successfully at a lower level. It seems like the portfolio-as-key to being hired is still not very true for that category.
emodendroket 10y ago
> For software developers coming from a primarily closed source background, it’s not really clear yet what just happened. To them, open source equals “working for free in your spare time”. > For those of us who spent the past decade making a billion dollar open source software company however, there is nothing free or spare time about working in the open. > [...] > The way to get a job at Red Hat last decade was obvious. You just started collaborating with Red Hat engineers on some piece of technology that they were working on in the open, then when it was clear that you were making a valuable contribution and were a great person to work with, you would apply for a job. Or they would hit you up. Actually, this sounds exactly like working for free. You do some spec work and if they like it maybe they'll hire you.
- falloutx 10y ago
  This kind of free work is not unheard of. If you haven't heard of StackOverflow Moderator Elections[1], You'd be blown away by the amount of free work people are willing to do for getting internet reputation. [1]: http://elections.stackexchange.com/#stackoverflow http://elections.stackexchange.com/#stackoverflow
  - emodendroket 10y ago
    I know it's not unheard of, but that hardly makes it good. http://www.nospec.com/ http://www.nospec.com/ At least in SO's case there's not a promise of possible employment being dangled in people's faces though -- it's all upfront.
- cyphar 10y ago
  > Actually, this sounds exactly like working for free. You do some spec work and if they like it maybe they'll hire you. Except the difference is that the with your doing is also applicable to you (presumably that's the reason you decided to hack on it). I got my job at SUSE in a similar fashion, but I never assumed I would get a job out of my contributions -- I was just a high school student at the time, playing with container runtimes. All of that being said, hiring people solely based on their online profile is a shitty idea. It might be useful to get leads that way, but if you have an applicant who has no online profile you should consider it an opportunity to convert them to a free software developer (not as a candidate who doesn't want to work in the open).
jasonpeacock 10y ago
He writes about network of connections, 1st, 2nd, 3rd degree and so on being lost when you change companies, but that is incorrect. Enough people I know and respect have moved on to other companies that my own network has actually grown. If I chose to apply elsewhere the first thing I'd do is reach out in my own network, not spam recruiters with my Github account. Your Github reputation can be used in addition to your network, or as a substitute if you have no network, but it will not replace the impact of having others already in the industry/company personally vouch for you. "Who you know" is still the best way to get your foot in the door, because we are all still social animals.
- sitapati 10y ago
  *Countries. When you change countries.
superzadeh 10y ago
> About me: I’m a Legendary Recruiter at Just Digital People; a Red Hat alumnus; a CoderDojo mentor; a founder of Magikcraft.io; the producer of The JDP Internship — The World’s #1 Software Development Reality Show; the host of The Best Tech Podcast in the World; and a father. All inside a commitment to empowering Queensland’s Silicon Economy. The Software industry needs more humility and less magicians. I believe that strong engineering skills are worth far more than a Github profile, and good recruiters will know how to spot this. If however you are looking to be hired as the new "Rockstar developer" of the latest trending startup running buzzword architecture, then a good public brand might be useful indeed.
- richardwhiuk 10y ago
  What is doesn't say in that is that they every contributed to an open source project.
Humdeee 10y ago
When asked for a github profile or evidence of contributions I immediately apologize in advance on the application (I actually use bitbucket and have no public repos). I explain that every side project I have ever done outside of school is aimed to help the public user but also serves as a means for financial side income. Therefore, it is confidential and professional code that I will not share. This creates 2 things as a byproduct: - It keeps my standards high as it's a paid for product - It forces me to actively maintain the projects and even provide a tiny bit of customer service I really don't care if people have a problem with this. It's their problem at that point, not mine. I have no issue demonstrating anything or talking about it, but we're not going over lines of code in my stuff. I choose not to treat my code hosting platform as a social network.
- sitapati 10y ago
  You could put it in a private repo on Github and have the contribution graph visible. If you work for someone else you can advocate for this. If you employ coders you can use it as a talent attraction piece, or just do it because it's a good thing to do for them.
d--b 10y ago
Here is some career advice: do not describe yourself as a "JavaScript Magician, Story-teller, Code DJ". That really doesnt play well to a recruiter who is looking to put together a team of people who like to work together.
- dexterdog 10y ago
  But what if I really am a ruby ninja and a node hero?
lithos 10y ago
If this becomes more true I'm glad that I choose electrical engineering over software whatever-you're-called-now. I can't imagine spending three years of weekends developing x companies software for a chance at an interview.
bjornlouser 10y ago
"It’s not your code on Github that counts — it’s what other people say on Github about your code that counts." In the near future all of our problems will be solved by minor celebrities of fashionable Github repos.
awinter-py 10y ago
ok but the actual impact on my career is that github distributes for free something that I sell.
- sitapati 10y ago
  Private repos with visible contribution graph.
5ilv3r 10y ago
One thing not mentioned is that the reputation of the programmer is tied to contribution quality. MOST programmers make low quality contributions because they are hired en mass to develop a project at a price point. They code for a buck. They are the outsourced projects, the rushed projects, and the tools made by people who obviously have no clue what they are doing. Github will allow the cream to rise to the top, sure, but those "Just a job" programmer roles are going to exist for a long time. This is because many companies simply want contract fulfilling crap, not quality code.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
austincheney 10y ago
The article is both very true and not yet completely true. Some developers still believe having a large community or online social media presence is important. It might very well be, but it has no bearing on code. Code is objective. It solves problems, passes tests, does something new, and performs better.... or it doesn't. Social media presence has no bearing on this at all. Yet, each impart a type of online trust. One is capabilities (competence) trust and the other is marketing or branding trust. For people who don't know the difference or don't understand the value in the code marketing/branding trust is the only thing that exists. For everybody else trust in branding loses value quickly and must struggle to compete with the other more objective trust factor. It should be noted this "everybody else" category is the minority but is more influential on things get built of prioritized.
kenoyer130 10y ago
I do a lot of interviews and I tell the interviewee that a github project with a clean commit history is worth the same or more then a college degree. Been burned many times by people who can do tricky CS stuff but don't actually do anything on the job. It doesn't have to be a large project, just enough to show me you know the basics of source control work flow and also how to communicate.
- vkou 10y ago
  > just enough to show me you know the basics of source control work flow Does this really take that much time to teach on the job? I haven't used source control outside of work, but I had no problem figuring out CVS, SVN, SeaPine Surround SCM (What a flaming pile of crap), or Perforce. Likewise, I've never used a bug tracker before work, but figuring out Jira/Bugzilla/(Whatever garbage HP sells) is much easier then reversing a linked list... Or explaining the *Nix everything-is-a-file model - both of which are parts of the typical CS degree.
tomc1985 10y ago
What is it with posts on Medium and people making these broad proclamations? Calm down folks, have some humility...
gravyboat 10y ago
Yawn, another one of these? Sure some companies look at your GitHub profile, but this post is just conjecture based on one person's very small bubble.
dudul 10y ago
Am I the only one who thinks that writing code is only one aspect of a software developer's job? Sure you can write good code and submit cool patches. How about talking to product owners? How about learning the ins and outs of an industry? How about identifying how to evolve a product in the real world? How about mentoring other developers? OK, a nice GitHub profile is a plus, but as a hiring manager it is never a make-it-or-break-it kind of thing.
nmeofthestate 10y ago
If a recruiter checks my github they'll find a project to internet-enable some bathroom scales. Hire or No Hire?
- amirmansour 10y ago
  Hired my good sir! When can you start? Good thing you posted it on GitHub, otherwise how else can we know you can code. /s
amirmansour 10y ago
I don't think most people doubt the utility of Github, but this writing seems to be from a person living in a bubble. Most people don't get the time and resources to work on open source. Some times, you can't even open source something, despite wanting to. For example, when I was in academia, I wanted to open source some worthwhile projects I had completed, but was never allowed to by superiors, because they considered them as competitive advantage IP.
ivan_gammel 10y ago
The main logical failure of this article is the wrong assumption that the code published some time ago does always reflect current skills or relevant to the current needs. What you have written even couple years ago is quite often no longer important: progress is fast, new design patterns, new libraries, new, more advanced coding approaches become popular, you learn, you continuously improve your skills only to be judged by what?.. Sometimes, in some cases, it makes sense to filter candidates by looking at their GH. But I would not bet on that: the better filter is the code being written today, which is unlikely to be available for most of the developers.
- Scea91 10y ago
  So you are basically saying that for example 3 years of experience is as good as 20?
  - ivan_gammel 10y ago
    Yes, they can be as good or even better, because not every experience is equal in relevance or quality of results.
rampage101 10y ago
The vast majority of programmers are not competing for magic internet points. It was a few years ago there was this massive craze to create good looking Stack Overflow and GitHub profiles. Most people are not giving away their time for free... if they are contributing to open source it usually benefits their company or hobby project somehow. Another issue is what happens to GitHub if they are not successful as a company. There was a story a few months ago here about how the company itself is losing money. How much will your profile be worth if GitHub goes out of business?
legostormtroopr 10y ago
This is such a double edged sword - GitHub as the central node in the network of trust, means GitHub has unprecedented control over developers in that network. Someone doesn't like you or your repo, and can convince GitHub to evict you - you're off the network, and all your contributions are gone.
kabdib 10y ago
I read a lot of resumes, and interview a lot of developers. The times I've looked at Github it was either "meh, this doesn't tell me much" or "Holy shit, run away". And about 5X in favor of running away. So it's been useful, in a sense, but not as a positive signal.
- zapt02 10y ago
  What would the "run away" signs be on a GitHub profile?
  - kabdib 10y ago
    Abject clones of other projects with no local commits, or minimal ones. Projects that just mashed together some other projects in a package. Projects that had a bunch of README content, but no actual code, or code that was minimal. (The few times I've seen school projects, they've been terrible . . . which is fine for a school project, but why make that public on github?) My guess is that, in general, the submitters wanted to look good to people (e.g., HR) who were not technical. They sure didn't pass a "I want to continue looking at this person" filter.
sqeaky 10y ago
I agree that in principle a strong portfolio is a great way to communicate software development skill. What I don't understand why he feel "now" is different. Github isn't exactly new and there is plenty of time for others to innovate in this space. Why haven't we seen this effect already? If it could happen fast it would already have happened. Why won't it be a slow taking a decade or more like the proliferation of Social networks?
daliwali 10y ago
>One of the principles of open source is meritocracy — the best idea wins, the most commits wins, the most passing tests wins, the best implementation wins, etc. This is so wrong that it's hilarious. Lots of garbage gets popular and there's tons of gems that go unnoticed. The meritocracy myth needs to die.
therealmarv 10y ago
Code commits do not reflect quality. And GitHub is not the only one side singular open repo (thinking of GitLab where I also contribute a lot).
chiefalchemist 10y ago
Commits are like hits (of the late 90's fame), or time of possession in football (aka soccer). That is a pointless metric. #FakeCommitNews
jwatte 10y ago
For somebody on their first or second job, GitHub might matter. Once your time is actually overcommitted by all the things you can do for your employer, half of which aren't even code, GitHub is the wrong priority.
mark-r 10y ago
So what do you do when someone else already has your name on Github? My name is not that common, and someone Googling me could reasonably assume that the code they find on Github is mine - but it isn't.
colehasson 10y ago
What tools and changes do 'we' want for how 'we on github' is perceived as part of our identity? 'We' is including a domain of engineers, students, employees, employers, scholars, bug complainants, star-ers, watchers, forkers, and jobCreators... 'Our identity' is including a domain of identification, participation, faithfulness, ownership, responsibility, responsivity, lineage, heritage, autonomy, unity, temporality, follows, followed-by, and profile pictures... Them 'perceiving' may now be an employer, fellow engineer, or utility algorithm, but I would like to plan for possible futures with higher orders of transparency in all these products. I ask HN because I know this community will be a transforming force that anneals or explodes the potent artifacts of github. My opinion may be that github is a value, but my observation is that it has given me value. Now, what may we hypothesize together?
- colehasson 10y ago
  I miss the HN I grew up with (2017ish). This post's comment thread is the most important and maybe consequential so far, that I've read, of 2017. [comment bait]
ryan-allen 10y ago
I don't agree with the premise that people will be contributing back to the open source software they use. Most consumers of Typescript for example, would be unable to contribute to the core codebase, the same goes for Rails, Redux, React, etc. The actual percentage of consumers vs contributors I would reckon at less than 0.01%, possibly lower. As a developer looking for a job, I would use GitHub to build a small project end-to-end to demonstrate competency, but that's just me and the slice of the programmer world I live in.
mvindahl 10y ago
The recruiting industry being what it is, I'm sure that the future holds plentys of job opportunities for people who can invert binary trees on whiteboards. Or, on a more serious note, there will also be jobs for anyone with skills and experience in the field. The job market is good for developers. I'd recommend OSS and GitHub not as a prerequisite to landing a job, but as a means of adding direction to your career. At your day job you don't always get to pick the technologies and sometimes you drift into the backwater of old legacy code (which the companies, understandably, need to maintain). Doing OSS can be a way of getting your feet wet doing exciting stuff of choice, building experience for your next job and maybe even build a network. Doing fun stuff. That should be the main reason IMHO.
pjmlp 10y ago
Github impact on software is only having to know yet another source control management tooling. Everything else only matters to the startup scene in Silicon Valley, or startups in other parts of the world that want to look cool and pretend they are actually located there. Or students believing the hype and trying to create a portfolio to cater to such companies. Many of us work with software that isn't allowed to go outside the virtual walls of the intranet and the last thing we want to do after 8 - 10 h work, is to sit again in front of a computer.
anonymous584 10y ago
Employers do not care about your open source work beyond it possibly demonstrating a commitment on your part to performing unpaid (and unappreciated) labor--which they euphemistically describe as "passion." That's it. Do not expect job offers from it. You'll get ample recruiter spam sent to whatever email address you associate with your projects, and possibly feature requests or complaints from entitled corporate users, but little else. In fact, it's apparently too much to even expect marginally less painful job interviews with fewer hoops to jump through as a result of your open source portfolio. Companies (and VCs like YC) not only do not adequately compensate those who produce the free software they use to build and grow their businesses, but they show no greater inclination to hire them, despite using their software. (Zed Shaw has written about his.) Absent a clear monetization strategy, I think the time developers spend working on open source side projects would be better spent building personal wealth, especially considering how many of them will effectively become unemployable once they turn forty.
Tomis02 10y ago
I know job posts where having a Stack Overflow account with a certain amount of reputation was a must-have. Surprised to see the article not mention that :)
golergka 10y ago
What a wonderful bubble author must be living in. I work in game development, and most of the tools I use are close sourced - and outsourcing anything of our own code is almost always out of the question. Please, please stop assuming that "software development" is a thing that you personally are inside of.
kstenerud 10y ago
The last 3 jobs of mine have been in a large part influenced by my OSS projects (one of them was ENTIRELY due to one of my projects). But I've always made a point of writing OSS code the same way I write closed projects: Well structured, documented code, proper tests, user guides and API documentation, architectural diagrams if necessary, and a professional attitude when dealing with users. Every major repository or sourceforge or sunsite tarball is a public statement to how I write real products that people use. Over the past 20 years I've written close to 500KLOC of finished OSS code. It's honed my skills, kept me sharp, helped others, and gotten me jobs.
spo81rty 10y ago
If a potential employee contributed to an open source project that is a plus and something to talk about. But I would NEVER expect it. 99% chance their previous employers would have kept all of their source code private and not public on github.
restalis 10y ago
"You just started collaborating with [insert your open-source choice] engineers on some piece of technology that they were working on in the open, then when it was clear that you were making a valuable contribution and were a great person to work with, you would apply for a job. Or they would hit you up" Clear to whom and to what degree or how exactly? Then even getting over this stratagem, they might ...or not! Maybe not, most likely. I understand that this might hurt some feelings or dispel some fantasies, but this is exactly the way you (as workforce asset) are encouraged to think, and not in your best interest, really. The reality, more likely than not, is that a business has to be run and the people responsible for it have to cover the business model's needs with some X number of engineers. If the business is doing well and the men with the ropes see real benefits in hiring more, than there you go -- green light for the lucky department for getting a new pal along. The circle of developers in that area already know the contributors and just open the gate for one(s) they like. That, of course, has nothing to do with absolute quality of the contributions. It's not necessarily the best of open-source contributors that get hired, it's not even the best contributors of some specific open-source commercial project like Red Hat, it's just the best (read "convenient") in the area they need at the moment. Realizing that we're talking about an entity living under business laws of survival, you also have to assume it has to employ some of the same prosaic principles in order to survive, just like anyone else. The rest is propaganda. Be assured that your position as free contributor suits the recipients a great deal already and they won't change anything about it just because. That being said, I agree that the exposed work works very well for engineering, just as for any other portfolio-based enrollment.
robodale 10y ago
What about those of us who have no interest in their githib profile, who instead use their spare time to build their own products/services. In my case, I make a significant percentage of my total earnings from side projects yet prefer to stay a full-time employee. To me, working for free on someone else's project on github is an opportunity cost I simply cannot justify.
tmsldd 10y ago
No thought your digital visibility helps to get through a job interview.. but it's hard to generalize.. if you get the job, your past disappears pretty fast and all that matters is the current sprint. I've building a team of about 70 sw engineers and one of my best hires was an art student who learned code a few years earlier and the other had just finished his graduation. Both are not really what one would consider as social skilled. If you give people a chance, a challenge, a good environment and respect them.. they will surprise you.
cja 10y ago
I'm in the UK. Over the last decade I've spoken to hundreds of recruiters that are looking for developers. I've never felt that any have technical knowledge. None would know what Github is, or care. They have a list of keywords and use them to search LinkedIn for candidates. If Github was one of those keywords then they'd care about it, but not enough to learn what it is.

382 points by kumaranvpl 10y ago

This way of looking at things is so corruptive. Does everything we do have to be about reputation? About our CV and how we're hired? About competition? How many commits does it take to compensate for that state of mind, for what it does to people? Whenever you bring those things, they only leave a scorched plain in their wake and the community is forced to move somewhere else. > One of the principles of open source is meritocracy — the best idea wins, the most commits wins, the most passing tests wins, the best implementation wins, etc. Have we learned nothing? "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure." - Goodhart's law

brightball 10y ago
I haven't heard that before, but that is a great quote.
- happy-go-lucky 10y ago
  Closely related ideas: "The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor." - Campbell's law (1976) "It is naive to try to predict the effects of a change in economic policy entirely on the basis of relationships observed in historical data, especially highly aggregated historical data." - Lucas critique (1976)
  - drivers99 10y ago
    Sounds like perverse incentives[1] in general. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverse_incentive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverse_incentive
    - happy-go-lucky 10y ago
      > In Hanoi, under French colonial rule, a program paying people a bounty for each rat tail handed in was intended to exterminate rats. Instead, it led to the farming of rats. LOL. Thank you.
      - zardo 10y ago
        http://e360.yale.edu/features/perverse_co2_payments_send_flood_of_money_to_china http://e360.yale.edu/features/perverse_co2_payments_send_flo... A modern incarnation: High incentives for the destruction of a harmful chemical stimulates it's production.
      - morgante 10y ago
        France is hardly the only colonizer to experience the problems of perverse incentives: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect
Bartweiss 10y ago
"The most commits wins" and "the most passing tests wins" are pretty disturbing sentiments. That's not a way to write good code, it's a way to take on low-effort tasks for commit count or write 10,000 happy-path unit tests. "Best idea" and "best implementation" are fine, but that's because they're subjective. Goodhart's Law is a great thing to reference here - the only thing you can't game is "actually producing good outcomes".

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

ENOTTY 10y ago

Disagree totally. There are gazillions of software developers quietly plugging away at gigantic companies with over 50k headcount whose contributions will never make it into open source. Think business intelligence software, accounting software, embedded systems developers, etc.

TurboHaskal 10y ago
It is still having impact, but in a negative way. Being rejected as a candidate because of a lacking Github profile is not unheard of.
- di4na 10y ago
  i can chip in. I was rejected at least a couple time because of that.
- woah 10y ago
  Is it worse than being rejected as a candidate for not having crammed on algorithm mind teasers before the interview?
  - solumos 10y ago
    Probably. I imagine it's on the same level as having the right combination of buzzwords on your resume - you're unlikely to make it to the brain teaser round without it.
- ryandrake 10y ago
  I wouldn't sweat it. Employers have been rejecting great tech candidates for dumb reasons for decades. I'd argue that if someone won't hire you because you don't have an account on some Internet service, you probably dodged a bullet and would not have wanted to work there in the first place.
  - endless1234 10y ago
    Though of course it can't /hurt/ to have a kick-ass Github profile, but I also doubt we'd be at a stage where it'd be required to get a job in the industry easily.

thehardsphere 10y ago

> Eventually a vast majority will be working in the open, and it will again be a level playing field differentiated on other factors. Haven't people been saying this for like, 10 years now?

prh8 10y ago

This almost seems like more of a hype article for Github than reality. It's certainly an extreme version of some truths (good and bad), but this is not how things are going to become for developers, certainly not as soon as 2018-2019.

isometric8 10y ago

I saw the reality of this on a job posting the other day, the recruiter wrote that applicants with github work will be given preference. This is pretty stupid really, a lot of really good developers are working on projects that cannot be shared or discussed or open sourced. Just because you haven't had the time between 1am and 3am to contribute to an open source project doesn't mean you suck as a developer.

tobiaslins 10y ago
You don't need to make your source public. Just check it in as private repository and your contribution graph is going to be filled. Some recruiter can now see that you work a lot - probably also on weekends and so on. A good looking github contribution graph looks kind of professional, also if you have starred some repositorys (which probably means you are active and love what you are doing)
- RodericDay 10y ago
  > Some recruiter can now see that you work a lot - probably also on weekends and so on. WTF how is this a good thing?
  - tobiaslins 10y ago
    A developer who loves his job/hobby also codes in his free time (because it is also a hobby) Of course, if being a develoepr is only a "job" - this sucks. For example, I am coding 8h+ a day during my fulltime job. When I am back at home/weekends, I also spend a lot of my time to code private projects instead of playing games
    - ghaff 10y ago
      What complete BS. Someone can certainly enjoy their job--and software development is certainly nothing special--without also wanting to spend their nights and weekends doing the same thing. For that matter, I'd probably take such a narrow set of interests as something of a disqualification.

samuli 10y ago

At least in Finland (don't know about the rest of Europe) the information must be collected from the applicant and not by doing internet searches [0]. If a company wants to use any other sources, they must ask the applicants permission first. [0] http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/2004/20040759 http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/2004/20040759

neoeldex 10y ago

A self proclaimed "Legendary recruiter" Kssshh

diimdeep 10y ago
He likes to exaggerate http://www.thebesttechpodcastintheworld.com/ http://www.thebesttechpodcastintheworld.com/
- sitapati 10y ago
  Don't forget this gem: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/04/17/job_ad_promises_meaningless_repetitive_work_on_the_net_stack/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/04/17/job_ad_promises_mea...

topbagsvk 10y ago

This is not how things are going to become for developers - http://www.topbagswatches.com/patek-philippe.html http://www.topbagswatches.com/patek-philippe.html

Asooka 10y ago

> Smart people will take advantage of this — they’ll contribute patches, issues, and comments upstream to the languages and frameworks that they use on the daily in their job — TypeScript, .NET, Redux. Yeah except for the tiny niggle that an overwhelming majority of contracts stipulate that you can't actually contribute to OSS either on or off the job due to the fact that every single thing you think of while employed (and sometimes for a period after your employment ends) belongs fully to your employer.

jobigoud 10y ago
I still can't understand how this doesn't fall into the abusive clause group.

dajohnson89 10y ago

Towards this end, is there a place that matches developers with small projects needing just a small amount of help? Say, a few small bug fixes or enhancements? I'd be happy to contribute but I don't want to commit too much of my time nor do I want to navigate the maze of a larger project.

cableshaft 10y ago

I think this guy feels this will be true because that's the bubble he lives in (an open source bubble). His bubble is not reflective of the entire software development community, however. Sure, it'd be nice if everything I worked on was available open source, but let's just look at one example where that's not a good idea: video games. Good luck getting the game industry to make their AAA games open source, especially before release, when hundreds of people are chomping at the bit to have a dirt easy time of cloning whatever game out there and tossing it on the app stores to make a few bucks off their broken, half-stolen mess of a game. It's a rampant problem right now (for example, 2048 and Flappy Bird both had open source versions, possibly unofficial... look how many clones of those games hit the app stores). Not to mention, game development often is a creative one where features are tried and then have to be cut for time, while audiences assume that anything they see will be in the final game, and if not they were maliciously lied to. This leads to any information about the game being closely guarded except for planned waaay in advance marketing campaigns, for most games (indies is a little different, indies need whatever exposure they can get usually). So no, not everyone is going to be working on open source software, and that's not going to change in the 2 year 'Mark my words!' timeline this guy has provided.

vvanders 10y ago
Yup, perfect example. Ironically game development is one if the areas where tech & algo is discussed widely and openly(which is what GDC used to be before it became a bit more commercialized). Most studios are happy to share their latest pathfinding/ai/rendering techniques which is almost always held close to the chest in other industries.
- sevensor 10y ago
  Even more perfect because 2048 was the open-source clone, and we're not even mentioning Threes, the game on which it was based.
  - macintux 10y ago
    Yeah, I've always been annoyed at the lack of recognition Threes tends to get.

joshstrange 10y ago

> Previously privileged developers will suddenly find their network disrupted. Good god.... I love GitHub and what it allows for but let's not paint this as the "commoners" knocking down the walls that protect the "elites" in their ivory castles. Commiting to GitHub does not, on it's own, make you a better developer or a better person. In the same way that not committing to GitHub does not, on it's own, make you worse developer or a worse person. I've met people who don't have single commit to a public GitHub repo that are FAR better developers (and people in some cases) than ones I've know that are deeply ingrained in a public project. In some, not all, cases there are different skillsets required for OS work vs working at a "closed source" company. And while we are on that subject I'm quite sick of some of the attitudes I see on HN sometimes around "closed source" like it's some evil thing. It's not, people have to eat, have to pay rent, have to support their families and anyone that thinks you can do easily that while working for a for-profit company are living in a dream world. How many times have we seen posts here about how little money is actually given to OS? Sure I'd love to be able to only work on OS or work for a company that is open but there are very few success stories in that area. The cognitive dissidence the HN crowd expels when they fawn over the SasS companies or various other SV unicorns (all closed source) here and then derides closed source is astounding. All of this to say the message of "Your GitHub profile will mean everything for your career" is simply bullshit. CAN it give you a leg up? Of course, but experience working for a company and in that kind of setting is much more valuable to the vast majority of companies. Take a look at Linus Torvalds, undoubtedly a genius and a person who has done immense good for the OS community, however his temper/attitude are legendary with HN periodically posting links to his smack downs on mailing lists or the like. That said do you think many companies are looking for that kind of an employee? I think not (No disrespect meant to him at all, it works for him and I doubt he is looking for a job at those kind of places anyways). Most of the companies I've worked for or interviewed with have either not cared at all about my GitHub profile or even if they say they do care they don't give it more than a passing glance at best. Focus on being good at what you do and if that happens in public on GitHub/GitLab/etc then all the better but don't bend over backwards to make your profile look good at the expense of actually knowing your shit.

uiri 10y ago
I'm quite sick of some of the attitudes I see on HN sometimes around "closed source" like it's some evil thing. Proprietary software generally leaves society worse off than if that same software were free and open source. In that sense, it is some evil thing. It's not, people have to eat, have to pay rent, have to support their families There are plenty of people who think of stripping, porn and prostitution as some evil thing. The argument that strippers, porn actors/actresses and prostitutes need to eat, pay rent, etc. does not detract from that. However, I do not think that there should be laws against porn nor against proprietary software. I do agree with you that it is much easier to find a job doing proprietary software development. I would be a hypocrite if I suggested that people should not take those jobs. Companies will fund open source if and only if it furthers their business objectives. You are correct in saying that open source projects are, in general, woefully underfunded and the open source company success stories are few and far between. I would like to think that the "closed source software is evil" crowd is mutually exclusive to the "fawning over SV unicorn" crowd. Focus on being good at what you do and if that happens in public on GitHub/GitLab/etc then all the better but don't bend over backwards to make your profile look good at the expense of actually knowing your shit. I agree. If you happen to do good work on GitHub, it can give you a leg up. Any effort poured into making one's profile "look good" is probably better spent actually doing good work or, failing that, studying for those silly data structures & algorithms whiteboard questions.

pyb 10y ago

That chestnut is getting a bit old now. For those of us who do have open source code on Github, the consensus is clear : despite the hype, most employers don't really look at Github in any depth. They mostly prefer to grill candidates, rather than look at what they've actually done. I guess it must be more enjoyable.

phkahler 10y ago
>> They mostly prefer to grill candidates, rather than look at what they've actually done. When I interview people I like to grill them on what they've actually done. All evidence you may find on a CV or on github is secondary to what they can actually speak to. That's my opinion of course, everyone has their way of finding good people.

nappy-doo 10y ago

Would you like to be judged by the number of lines of code you submit? It's not much different than being judged by your commit graph on GitHub. If we judge ourselves, and others by this ridiculous metric, we're cheapening our profession. We are knowledge workers. We work by thinking and acting. A graph captures none of the first. The most valuable code I've ever written for an employer was about 100 lines that took 2 weeks to write. Would the commit graph capture that? I have gotten into arguments with my boss about hiring based on commit graphs and commit counts. I lost. We hired someone who checks in a lot of stuff, but often has to fix it with other changes. His graph and change count looks great. It's a nightmare working with him. In my experience, commit graphs are bogus.

KiwiCoder 10y ago

I do a lot of recruiting, for both paid and volunteer coding roles. I've been hiring for about 13 years, and I've been coding professionally for about 25 years. Before that I coded as a hobby, from about age 11. Speaking from this experience, and as someone who reviews on average 20-50 coder profiles a week, the public commit history of a coder is almost never a significant factor. I don't see any trends that indicate this is changing, either. The vast majority just don't have much to show, having spent their years working behind walls on closed software. Instead of relying on a public portfolio that in most cases won't exist, I rely on talking to these people directly, programmer to programmer. If we can code together, on the actual code they would be working on, that's about as good as it gets. In other words, I rely on my experience as a coder to help make what are, ultimately, subjective judgement calls.

sotojuan 10y ago
I can confirm from the employee side. I've worked with 40-60 people total that I at least sort of remember. Sure, that's not many people and I'm still new to the industry, but I can tell you that of all of these people only one or two have significant public GitHub activity. All the rest have empty GitHub accounts (aside from work). These are all well employed programmers at startups. They're doing fine. The importance of "side projects" is overrated on the internet.
- cmrdporcupine 10y ago
  I used to be more into having side projects, and I continue to play with things, but due to employee IP contracts it's not really feasible to release them. My employer owns my brain, and while they can give permission to release things here and there, there are restrictions and processes to go through, and it really inhibits spontaneous contributions. And I work at a major tech BigCo(tm), with a lot of smart software engineers, the majority of which are under similar restrictions. Frankly, any potential employer who expected to see said contributions from me and use it to judge me or my coworkers as candidates would be making a poor decision.
  - 10y ago

donretag 10y ago

“All the work you do here will be in the open. In the future you won’t have a CV — people will just Google you.” Interviewer: I see you have a impressive profile on Github, but can you write an algorithm for quick sort on the whiteboard?

Bartweiss 10y ago
There should be a rule that any formulation of "In the future, you won't... You'll just..." is guaranteed to be wrong. It's right up there with predicting that no one will ever need ${product}, or writing news headlines with yes/no questions.
kbart 10y ago
Actually, as a security and privacy advocate, I'm proud that you will get exactly 0 results (not counting person of the same name) entering my real name to Google search and I'm actively keeping it that way.

Nekorosu 10y ago

The opinion represented in the article is based on top of several false assumptions. 1. GitHub represents the major part of software development world. No. It's a tip of an iceberg. I don't think I have to elaborate this one. 2. Open source software development model is an absolute winner. No. It's just one model of development which fits some kinds of projects better than the others. Companies tend to open-source tools. Product's code is usually closed source. Obviously there are a lot of developers who spend most of their time on closed source projects. Some of them also have life. 3. Your open source projects contribution helps recruiters to evaluate you performance for any kind of software development project. Not true. A lot of jobs are either legacy projects work, niche technologies work or both. Some niche technologies are closed source. Some legacy technologies predate open-source culture. The problems you face doing open source projects are very different from those you face doing b2b, b2c projects. Having said that the author's opinion looks invalid to me.

jurassic 10y ago

I recently read a novel called "A Fine Balance" by Rohinton Mistry. One character, Ashraf Chacha, is a man who works as a tailor. He is extremely grieved by the death of his wife. He talks about how when she was alive it never bothered him to spend all of his time reading or sewing - just knowing she was there in another room was enough. But after she dies, he regrets all the time he foolishly spent away from her. I don't want to look back on my life with that feeling. As adults, we have very little free time and spending it on software seems like a gross misallocation of resources, even if our careers would benefit. There's more to life than work.

justinator 10y ago
A Fine Balance is an absolute masterpiece of a book. There's many lessons to be learned from it.
ryandrake 10y ago
I used to agree with that, but competition for employment has gotten so cut-throat that when you spend time not being productive, not learning, not building your network, not adding to your resume, you can be assured that your competition (people wanting your job or the job you also want) ARE doing these things. Thanks to AI and robotics, we can expect things to get more and more cut-throat as time goes on. When you're out of work and a few months from insolvency, you're not looking back and saying "Man I wish I spent more time slacking off with my friends and family".
- tonyedgecombe 10y ago
  When I look around me I don't see that much competition, rather endless mediocrity punctuated with occasional sparks of competence. If I was out of work I would be leaning on my friends and family for moral and even practical support. Doing nothing but work is a waste of a life.
  - TheOneTrueKyle 10y ago
    Sounds like you have a great life and great network of people around you so maybe telling someone what they love is a waste of life is probably not a good use of your life. Maybe realize that some people struggle to find happiness and will constantly be struggling. Not everybody can have a family. Not everyone can find a job after school. Not everything is easy. Maybe keep that in mind.

doodpants 10y ago

15 years ago, you went to Freshmeat or SourceForge to find open source projects. Now it's Github. In 5-10 years, a different open source repository might be more popular. The author seems unconcerned about a particular company having so much control. Note that he compares not having a Github account to not having email or a cellphone in general, rather than to not having e.g. Gmail or an iPhone in particular, which would be a more apt analogy. It's a disheartening reminder of the trend of the internet moving away from decentralized protocols to centralized services.

peteretep 10y ago

> Over the next 12–24 months > — in other words, between > 2018 and 2019 — how software > developers are hired is > going to change radically. Just in time for Linux on the desktop

mdekkers 10y ago

For software developers coming from a primarily closed source background, it’s not really clear yet what just happened. To them, open source equals “working for free in your spare time”. I'm guessing that would > 80% of all software developed globally?

whack 10y ago

I have to say that this post was inspiring to read. It's everything that software developers had dreamed of and idealized. Owning your own career. Building your own brand. Doing your work in the open. Your career progress being decentralized and determined by the trust you've built in your network of colleagues, and not by some pointy haired business guy. Unfortunately, I don't think any of the above is realistically going to happen at any point in the next 10 years. The majority of paid-for-code is proprietary, meaning that your 9-5 work-product can never be "googled" by outsiders. As a consequence of this, recruiters and hiring managers will continue to treat open-source work as second-class-indicators, behind your resume, CV and references. It's going to take a major paradigm shift in engineering/business culture, before any of this changes. That said, the author might be wrong about the timeframe, but he does paint a noble vision for the future. One that I'm sure future generations will be working in, and one that I hope I can experience one day.

KirinDave 10y ago

I think that looking at a GitHub profile is tricky. Very few people get to work on open source projects. And quite frankly, Linux's model of "trying to get noticed by the admins" doesn't scale well at all. There is a lot more to it than he's suggesting. If you want to interview people effectively try this crazy formula: 0. Ask for a remote tech screen. Ask for a simple piece of work that you can evaluate and that resembles real work. Make sure it can be built and tested imperially (the best way is automatically). This should be simple and not 8 hours of work. Don't ask people to code on a whiteboard or do their best algorithmic design in a high stress interview session, you won't get it. 1. Be prepared. Know what you're interviewing for and list out he skills. Read a candidates resume and review the prior work they offer. Read their code first. 2. Code review their tech screen. 3. Make sure to ask questions about their approach to work, leadership and projects. Encourage them to ask you similar questions. 4. Have a broad cross section of your company interview. Mix up who does this, diversity is a plus here. Also, make sure designers and HR folks get a bit of time, not just engineers. 5. If the position is senior tech, whitebiarding is acceptable for architecture or planning or diagrams.

jstewartmobile 10y ago

This article is a kind of half-truth. Sure, RedHat may reach out to you if you're consistently providing value, though that's probably the exception. Look at how much OpenBSD code gets used in highly profitable commercial products, then compare it to the level of donations they get from the same companies...

pselbert 10y ago

I find it difficult to imagine doing extensive web work (Rails, Django, PHP, JS) without ever touching GitHub. Surely, in the course of your daily work using giant open source projects you'll file a bug, comment on an issue or even submit a pull request. Most large applications are built off of dozens, or hundreds, of open source libraries—all of which have bugs at various times. I don't expect all web developers to have side-projects or libraries, but I would expect they'll interact with open source projects in some way. This way of thinking clearly doesn't apply in more closed source worlds like games, finance or giant enterprise—but it certainly holds for startup/web work in my experience.

harpastum 10y ago
It would be awesome if that was something everyone was able to do, but often company policy makes it really hard. I've worked at multiple companies where the red tape involved in having my contribution merged into a public repo was such a pain that it just wasn't worth it.
QuantumGravy 10y ago
My day job involves extensive web work. I've found plenty I could contribute, but I'm at an oldschool corp. that just isn't going to approve open source contributions on company time, using company resources and source code. On the flip side, they also don't care what I program outside work. It's just that my personal projects aren't web related and don't lend themselves to being open sourced.

steven777400 10y ago

A decade ago when I was teaching computer programming full time at the community college, I told my students that their online portfolio would be the most important thing to differentiate them from their classmates. I'm actually slightly less sure of this today... It's probably true for startups/"tech" companies; but many, many programmers work LOB in non-tech companies and I haven't heard/seen much that the hiring process has changed. If anything, we've come closer to the consensus that a small "work sample" is the best possible kind of interview - show up, here's a laptop and a small CR or project, implement. This has the advantage of being do-able remotely too, of course. Pull requests back to languages and frameworks works if you're at the skill level and motivation to work at the framework level (e.g. Google, Facebook, Microsoft; the companies making the mainstream frameworks). But it's a dis-service to ignore many, many programmers working successfully at a lower level. It seems like the portfolio-as-key to being hired is still not very true for that category.

emodendroket 10y ago

> For software developers coming from a primarily closed source background, it’s not really clear yet what just happened. To them, open source equals “working for free in your spare time”. > For those of us who spent the past decade making a billion dollar open source software company however, there is nothing free or spare time about working in the open. > [...] > The way to get a job at Red Hat last decade was obvious. You just started collaborating with Red Hat engineers on some piece of technology that they were working on in the open, then when it was clear that you were making a valuable contribution and were a great person to work with, you would apply for a job. Or they would hit you up. Actually, this sounds exactly like working for free. You do some spec work and if they like it maybe they'll hire you.

falloutx 10y ago
This kind of free work is not unheard of. If you haven't heard of StackOverflow Moderator Elections[1], You'd be blown away by the amount of free work people are willing to do for getting internet reputation. [1]: http://elections.stackexchange.com/#stackoverflow http://elections.stackexchange.com/#stackoverflow
- emodendroket 10y ago
  I know it's not unheard of, but that hardly makes it good. http://www.nospec.com/ http://www.nospec.com/ At least in SO's case there's not a promise of possible employment being dangled in people's faces though -- it's all upfront.
cyphar 10y ago
> Actually, this sounds exactly like working for free. You do some spec work and if they like it maybe they'll hire you. Except the difference is that the with your doing is also applicable to you (presumably that's the reason you decided to hack on it). I got my job at SUSE in a similar fashion, but I never assumed I would get a job out of my contributions -- I was just a high school student at the time, playing with container runtimes. All of that being said, hiring people solely based on their online profile is a shitty idea. It might be useful to get leads that way, but if you have an applicant who has no online profile you should consider it an opportunity to convert them to a free software developer (not as a candidate who doesn't want to work in the open).

jasonpeacock 10y ago

He writes about network of connections, 1st, 2nd, 3rd degree and so on being lost when you change companies, but that is incorrect. Enough people I know and respect have moved on to other companies that my own network has actually grown. If I chose to apply elsewhere the first thing I'd do is reach out in my own network, not spam recruiters with my Github account. Your Github reputation can be used in addition to your network, or as a substitute if you have no network, but it will not replace the impact of having others already in the industry/company personally vouch for you. "Who you know" is still the best way to get your foot in the door, because we are all still social animals.

sitapati 10y ago
*Countries. When you change countries.

superzadeh 10y ago

> About me: I’m a Legendary Recruiter at Just Digital People; a Red Hat alumnus; a CoderDojo mentor; a founder of Magikcraft.io; the producer of The JDP Internship — The World’s #1 Software Development Reality Show; the host of The Best Tech Podcast in the World; and a father. All inside a commitment to empowering Queensland’s Silicon Economy. The Software industry needs more humility and less magicians. I believe that strong engineering skills are worth far more than a Github profile, and good recruiters will know how to spot this. If however you are looking to be hired as the new "Rockstar developer" of the latest trending startup running buzzword architecture, then a good public brand might be useful indeed.

richardwhiuk 10y ago
What is doesn't say in that is that they every contributed to an open source project.

Humdeee 10y ago

When asked for a github profile or evidence of contributions I immediately apologize in advance on the application (I actually use bitbucket and have no public repos). I explain that every side project I have ever done outside of school is aimed to help the public user but also serves as a means for financial side income. Therefore, it is confidential and professional code that I will not share. This creates 2 things as a byproduct: - It keeps my standards high as it's a paid for product - It forces me to actively maintain the projects and even provide a tiny bit of customer service I really don't care if people have a problem with this. It's their problem at that point, not mine. I have no issue demonstrating anything or talking about it, but we're not going over lines of code in my stuff. I choose not to treat my code hosting platform as a social network.

sitapati 10y ago
You could put it in a private repo on Github and have the contribution graph visible. If you work for someone else you can advocate for this. If you employ coders you can use it as a talent attraction piece, or just do it because it's a good thing to do for them.

d--b 10y ago

Here is some career advice: do not describe yourself as a "JavaScript Magician, Story-teller, Code DJ". That really doesnt play well to a recruiter who is looking to put together a team of people who like to work together.

dexterdog 10y ago
But what if I really am a ruby ninja and a node hero?

lithos 10y ago

If this becomes more true I'm glad that I choose electrical engineering over software whatever-you're-called-now. I can't imagine spending three years of weekends developing x companies software for a chance at an interview.

bjornlouser 10y ago

"It’s not your code on Github that counts — it’s what other people say on Github about your code that counts." In the near future all of our problems will be solved by minor celebrities of fashionable Github repos.

awinter-py 10y ago

ok but the actual impact on my career is that github distributes for free something that I sell.

sitapati 10y ago
Private repos with visible contribution graph.

5ilv3r 10y ago

One thing not mentioned is that the reputation of the programmer is tied to contribution quality. MOST programmers make low quality contributions because they are hired en mass to develop a project at a price point. They code for a buck. They are the outsourced projects, the rushed projects, and the tools made by people who obviously have no clue what they are doing. Github will allow the cream to rise to the top, sure, but those "Just a job" programmer roles are going to exist for a long time. This is because many companies simply want contract fulfilling crap, not quality code.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

austincheney 10y ago

The article is both very true and not yet completely true. Some developers still believe having a large community or online social media presence is important. It might very well be, but it has no bearing on code. Code is objective. It solves problems, passes tests, does something new, and performs better.... or it doesn't. Social media presence has no bearing on this at all. Yet, each impart a type of online trust. One is capabilities (competence) trust and the other is marketing or branding trust. For people who don't know the difference or don't understand the value in the code marketing/branding trust is the only thing that exists. For everybody else trust in branding loses value quickly and must struggle to compete with the other more objective trust factor. It should be noted this "everybody else" category is the minority but is more influential on things get built of prioritized.

kenoyer130 10y ago

I do a lot of interviews and I tell the interviewee that a github project with a clean commit history is worth the same or more then a college degree. Been burned many times by people who can do tricky CS stuff but don't actually do anything on the job. It doesn't have to be a large project, just enough to show me you know the basics of source control work flow and also how to communicate.

vkou 10y ago
> just enough to show me you know the basics of source control work flow Does this really take that much time to teach on the job? I haven't used source control outside of work, but I had no problem figuring out CVS, SVN, SeaPine Surround SCM (What a flaming pile of crap), or Perforce. Likewise, I've never used a bug tracker before work, but figuring out Jira/Bugzilla/(Whatever garbage HP sells) is much easier then reversing a linked list... Or explaining the *Nix everything-is-a-file model - both of which are parts of the typical CS degree.

tomc1985 10y ago

What is it with posts on Medium and people making these broad proclamations? Calm down folks, have some humility...

gravyboat 10y ago

Yawn, another one of these? Sure some companies look at your GitHub profile, but this post is just conjecture based on one person's very small bubble.

dudul 10y ago

Am I the only one who thinks that writing code is only one aspect of a software developer's job? Sure you can write good code and submit cool patches. How about talking to product owners? How about learning the ins and outs of an industry? How about identifying how to evolve a product in the real world? How about mentoring other developers? OK, a nice GitHub profile is a plus, but as a hiring manager it is never a make-it-or-break-it kind of thing.

nmeofthestate 10y ago

If a recruiter checks my github they'll find a project to internet-enable some bathroom scales. Hire or No Hire?

amirmansour 10y ago
Hired my good sir! When can you start? Good thing you posted it on GitHub, otherwise how else can we know you can code. /s

amirmansour 10y ago

I don't think most people doubt the utility of Github, but this writing seems to be from a person living in a bubble. Most people don't get the time and resources to work on open source. Some times, you can't even open source something, despite wanting to. For example, when I was in academia, I wanted to open source some worthwhile projects I had completed, but was never allowed to by superiors, because they considered them as competitive advantage IP.

ivan_gammel 10y ago

The main logical failure of this article is the wrong assumption that the code published some time ago does always reflect current skills or relevant to the current needs. What you have written even couple years ago is quite often no longer important: progress is fast, new design patterns, new libraries, new, more advanced coding approaches become popular, you learn, you continuously improve your skills only to be judged by what?.. Sometimes, in some cases, it makes sense to filter candidates by looking at their GH. But I would not bet on that: the better filter is the code being written today, which is unlikely to be available for most of the developers.

Scea91 10y ago
So you are basically saying that for example 3 years of experience is as good as 20?
- ivan_gammel 10y ago
  Yes, they can be as good or even better, because not every experience is equal in relevance or quality of results.

rampage101 10y ago

The vast majority of programmers are not competing for magic internet points. It was a few years ago there was this massive craze to create good looking Stack Overflow and GitHub profiles. Most people are not giving away their time for free... if they are contributing to open source it usually benefits their company or hobby project somehow. Another issue is what happens to GitHub if they are not successful as a company. There was a story a few months ago here about how the company itself is losing money. How much will your profile be worth if GitHub goes out of business?

legostormtroopr 10y ago

This is such a double edged sword - GitHub as the central node in the network of trust, means GitHub has unprecedented control over developers in that network. Someone doesn't like you or your repo, and can convince GitHub to evict you - you're off the network, and all your contributions are gone.

kabdib 10y ago

I read a lot of resumes, and interview a lot of developers. The times I've looked at Github it was either "meh, this doesn't tell me much" or "Holy shit, run away". And about 5X in favor of running away. So it's been useful, in a sense, but not as a positive signal.

zapt02 10y ago
What would the "run away" signs be on a GitHub profile?
- kabdib 10y ago
  Abject clones of other projects with no local commits, or minimal ones. Projects that just mashed together some other projects in a package. Projects that had a bunch of README content, but no actual code, or code that was minimal. (The few times I've seen school projects, they've been terrible . . . which is fine for a school project, but why make that public on github?) My guess is that, in general, the submitters wanted to look good to people (e.g., HR) who were not technical. They sure didn't pass a "I want to continue looking at this person" filter.

sqeaky 10y ago

I agree that in principle a strong portfolio is a great way to communicate software development skill. What I don't understand why he feel "now" is different. Github isn't exactly new and there is plenty of time for others to innovate in this space. Why haven't we seen this effect already? If it could happen fast it would already have happened. Why won't it be a slow taking a decade or more like the proliferation of Social networks?

daliwali 10y ago

>One of the principles of open source is meritocracy — the best idea wins, the most commits wins, the most passing tests wins, the best implementation wins, etc. This is so wrong that it's hilarious. Lots of garbage gets popular and there's tons of gems that go unnoticed. The meritocracy myth needs to die.

therealmarv 10y ago

Code commits do not reflect quality. And GitHub is not the only one side singular open repo (thinking of GitLab where I also contribute a lot).

chiefalchemist 10y ago

Commits are like hits (of the late 90's fame), or time of possession in football (aka soccer). That is a pointless metric. #FakeCommitNews

jwatte 10y ago

For somebody on their first or second job, GitHub might matter. Once your time is actually overcommitted by all the things you can do for your employer, half of which aren't even code, GitHub is the wrong priority.

mark-r 10y ago

So what do you do when someone else already has your name on Github? My name is not that common, and someone Googling me could reasonably assume that the code they find on Github is mine - but it isn't.

colehasson 10y ago

What tools and changes do 'we' want for how 'we on github' is perceived as part of our identity? 'We' is including a domain of engineers, students, employees, employers, scholars, bug complainants, star-ers, watchers, forkers, and jobCreators... 'Our identity' is including a domain of identification, participation, faithfulness, ownership, responsibility, responsivity, lineage, heritage, autonomy, unity, temporality, follows, followed-by, and profile pictures... Them 'perceiving' may now be an employer, fellow engineer, or utility algorithm, but I would like to plan for possible futures with higher orders of transparency in all these products. I ask HN because I know this community will be a transforming force that anneals or explodes the potent artifacts of github. My opinion may be that github is a value, but my observation is that it has given me value. Now, what may we hypothesize together?

colehasson 10y ago
I miss the HN I grew up with (2017ish). This post's comment thread is the most important and maybe consequential so far, that I've read, of 2017. [comment bait]

ryan-allen 10y ago

I don't agree with the premise that people will be contributing back to the open source software they use. Most consumers of Typescript for example, would be unable to contribute to the core codebase, the same goes for Rails, Redux, React, etc. The actual percentage of consumers vs contributors I would reckon at less than 0.01%, possibly lower. As a developer looking for a job, I would use GitHub to build a small project end-to-end to demonstrate competency, but that's just me and the slice of the programmer world I live in.

mvindahl 10y ago

The recruiting industry being what it is, I'm sure that the future holds plentys of job opportunities for people who can invert binary trees on whiteboards. Or, on a more serious note, there will also be jobs for anyone with skills and experience in the field. The job market is good for developers. I'd recommend OSS and GitHub not as a prerequisite to landing a job, but as a means of adding direction to your career. At your day job you don't always get to pick the technologies and sometimes you drift into the backwater of old legacy code (which the companies, understandably, need to maintain). Doing OSS can be a way of getting your feet wet doing exciting stuff of choice, building experience for your next job and maybe even build a network. Doing fun stuff. That should be the main reason IMHO.

pjmlp 10y ago

Github impact on software is only having to know yet another source control management tooling. Everything else only matters to the startup scene in Silicon Valley, or startups in other parts of the world that want to look cool and pretend they are actually located there. Or students believing the hype and trying to create a portfolio to cater to such companies. Many of us work with software that isn't allowed to go outside the virtual walls of the intranet and the last thing we want to do after 8 - 10 h work, is to sit again in front of a computer.

anonymous584 10y ago

Employers do not care about your open source work beyond it possibly demonstrating a commitment on your part to performing unpaid (and unappreciated) labor--which they euphemistically describe as "passion." That's it. Do not expect job offers from it. You'll get ample recruiter spam sent to whatever email address you associate with your projects, and possibly feature requests or complaints from entitled corporate users, but little else. In fact, it's apparently too much to even expect marginally less painful job interviews with fewer hoops to jump through as a result of your open source portfolio. Companies (and VCs like YC) not only do not adequately compensate those who produce the free software they use to build and grow their businesses, but they show no greater inclination to hire them, despite using their software. (Zed Shaw has written about his.) Absent a clear monetization strategy, I think the time developers spend working on open source side projects would be better spent building personal wealth, especially considering how many of them will effectively become unemployable once they turn forty.

Tomis02 10y ago

I know job posts where having a Stack Overflow account with a certain amount of reputation was a must-have. Surprised to see the article not mention that :)

golergka 10y ago

What a wonderful bubble author must be living in. I work in game development, and most of the tools I use are close sourced - and outsourcing anything of our own code is almost always out of the question. Please, please stop assuming that "software development" is a thing that you personally are inside of.

kstenerud 10y ago

The last 3 jobs of mine have been in a large part influenced by my OSS projects (one of them was ENTIRELY due to one of my projects). But I've always made a point of writing OSS code the same way I write closed projects: Well structured, documented code, proper tests, user guides and API documentation, architectural diagrams if necessary, and a professional attitude when dealing with users. Every major repository or sourceforge or sunsite tarball is a public statement to how I write real products that people use. Over the past 20 years I've written close to 500KLOC of finished OSS code. It's honed my skills, kept me sharp, helped others, and gotten me jobs.

spo81rty 10y ago

If a potential employee contributed to an open source project that is a plus and something to talk about. But I would NEVER expect it. 99% chance their previous employers would have kept all of their source code private and not public on github.

restalis 10y ago

"You just started collaborating with [insert your open-source choice] engineers on some piece of technology that they were working on in the open, then when it was clear that you were making a valuable contribution and were a great person to work with, you would apply for a job. Or they would hit you up" Clear to whom and to what degree or how exactly? Then even getting over this stratagem, they might ...or not! Maybe not, most likely. I understand that this might hurt some feelings or dispel some fantasies, but this is exactly the way you (as workforce asset) are encouraged to think, and not in your best interest, really. The reality, more likely than not, is that a business has to be run and the people responsible for it have to cover the business model's needs with some X number of engineers. If the business is doing well and the men with the ropes see real benefits in hiring more, than there you go -- green light for the lucky department for getting a new pal along. The circle of developers in that area already know the contributors and just open the gate for one(s) they like. That, of course, has nothing to do with absolute quality of the contributions. It's not necessarily the best of open-source contributors that get hired, it's not even the best contributors of some specific open-source commercial project like Red Hat, it's just the best (read "convenient") in the area they need at the moment. Realizing that we're talking about an entity living under business laws of survival, you also have to assume it has to employ some of the same prosaic principles in order to survive, just like anyone else. The rest is propaganda. Be assured that your position as free contributor suits the recipients a great deal already and they won't change anything about it just because. That being said, I agree that the exposed work works very well for engineering, just as for any other portfolio-based enrollment.

robodale 10y ago

What about those of us who have no interest in their githib profile, who instead use their spare time to build their own products/services. In my case, I make a significant percentage of my total earnings from side projects yet prefer to stay a full-time employee. To me, working for free on someone else's project on github is an opportunity cost I simply cannot justify.

tmsldd 10y ago

No thought your digital visibility helps to get through a job interview.. but it's hard to generalize.. if you get the job, your past disappears pretty fast and all that matters is the current sprint. I've building a team of about 70 sw engineers and one of my best hires was an art student who learned code a few years earlier and the other had just finished his graduation. Both are not really what one would consider as social skilled. If you give people a chance, a challenge, a good environment and respect them.. they will surprise you.

cja 10y ago

I'm in the UK. Over the last decade I've spoken to hundreds of recruiters that are looking for developers. I've never felt that any have technical knowledge. None would know what Github is, or care. They have a list of keywords and use them to search LinkedIn for candidates. If Github was one of those keywords then they'd care about it, but not enough to learn what it is.