> A "hero" project is one where 80% or more of the contributions are made by the 20% of the developers. Where does this definition come from? It sounds quite t

> A "hero" project is one where 80% or more of the contributions are made by the 20% of the developers. Where does this definition come from? It sounds quite typical to me. Even in large projects like the Linux kernel, if you break them down into comprehensible units and subsystems, I would expect you'd find essentially the same thing. The vast majority of projects likely meet the "hero project" threshold defined above, whether they're good or bad. I don't know of any movement to specifically prevent having primary contributors; the main interest from the corporate world is ensuring that primary contributors can be cycled as necessary. This doesn't seem like news in any way. I don't want to be unduly dismissive as I haven't read the paper, but I think I'm catching a distinctive whiff of "publish or perish" in the vicinity...