14 ms·

Designers, how do we get you guys to contribute to open source projects?

• pieter 16y ago
  My girlfriend tried to design an icon for an open-source app she uses, but the experience hasn't been really great. I think the way developers in open-source projects communicate doesn't really work with designers. She sent the photoshop source file and a png to the mailing list, but was told to send in a patch instead, which meant she had to learn how to use git to check out the repository, add the icon to the repo, and then generate a git patch. Only after that, she was told that they couldn't use the photoshop source file because they didn't have photoshop. Finally, one of the developers imported the file into the GIMP, changed some stuff on the icon without discussion, botched the output and then added that to the project. That was enough for her to not try doing something like this again.
  • gidea 16y ago
    This seems like one in a million. I don't think webdev's are all like that but I see your point.
  • Sirupsen 16y ago
    Yes, version control definitely seems like one of the biggest gaps. The communication between developers and designers have to improve, and the developers will have to realize they can't ask every designer for commits, but they can probably ask them for .zip files.
    • vog 16y ago
      On the other hand, maybe we should make designers want to use Git. This might be not as crazy as it sounds, as I recently learned: A few weeks ago, there was a short presentation about Git, targeted at non-programmers such as graphics and web designers. After the presentation, one of the designers (who apparently already knew about Git) stood up and criticized the presenter for not going deeper into branches and auto-branching. Of course, the presenter intentionally left that topic out, in order to not confuse all those Git newbies. However, the designer argued that this is what would make Git interesting for designers. He said that all this diff/commit/push/pull stuff was boring for designers where a "diff" between graphics files is neither readable nor meaningful, and where automatic merges are impossible anyway. But branching has the power to reflect the natural work-flow of a designer who permanently goes back to previous versions in order to try different variants. Reflecting this via "Save as ..." (and naming files accordingly) is very cumbersome. Although I personally think this guy overrated the power of branches, this might change once the Git user interfaces becomes simpler to use, more targeted to designers (rather than just software developers) and better integrated into graphical tools like Gimp, Inkscape or even Photoshop.
      • rchowe 16y ago
        What Git really needs is a few tools like Versions and Cornerstone were for SVN: simple apps that didn't require any command line use at all. Git Tower might be there, but I haven't used it so I can't say that 100%.
        • deleted 16y ago
          [deleted]
      • random42 16y ago
        > On the other hand, maybe we should make designers want to use Git. I use Git, and its a wonderful piece of software craft indeed, but it does not have Windows/Mac clients, that designers often use, as their base OS. A decent usable frontend for Git, on platforms other than Linux too, needs to be developed, for it to be usable by designers. Edit - I meant to say officially supported frontend and support for other oses by git.
        • tvon 16y ago
          Relevant Stack Overflow question on GUI git clients: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/455698/best-visual-client-for-git-on-mac-os-x http://stackoverflow.com/questions/455698/best-visual-client...
        • vog 16y ago
          > Git [...] does not have Windows/Mac clients Since the target group were designers, the presenter used a Mac, and tried to do everything using a GUI client for Git. I don't remember which one he used, but it ran natively on the Mac and it looked quite nice. (Still, the presenter sometimes struggled with that GUI. He was obviously more used to the command line.)
          • jackolas 16y ago
            Most git actions don't need a deep understanding of Git nor a full GUI to function. I think git gui and gitx probably are enough to get a designer going.
  • beaumartinez 16y ago
    > Finally, one of the developers imported the file into the GIMP, changed some stuff on the icon without discussion, botched the output and then added that to the project. Isn't that part of the "contract" of FOSS? You relinquish copyright of your contributions to the project as a whole. (I can see how this can bite designers who don't know much about the FOSS movement.) I suppose in this situation it's a good thing they use a version control system for designer contributions. It certainly is bad practice to change something major with no discussion, but when you contribute something, expect it to be changed.
    • jacobolus 16y ago
      You’re missing the point. If an open-source project treated a programmer with the same lack of respect, I wouldn’t expect any different a response. There’s no “contract” that says I have to volunteer my time to someone who won’t even appreciate the donation. On the other hand, I’m not sure it’s fair to indict all open-source projects based on one side of a single story. I’d be interested to hear more of the details in this case; sometimes people walk away angry about simple misunderstandings and mixups.
      • rue 16y ago
        I understand what you're saying…but as an open-source contributor I certainly expect that my code can be modified for various reasons. I guess a “work of art” would feel more personal, and (unless given a tight spec of elements that must be included) is more of a candidate for either rejection or admission as-is. For changes I'd certainly expect a request “can you add a wizard hat on the ninja?” rather than someone modifying it themselves. That said, I don't think it's a one-way street (and good design is sorely lacking). The designers should have or take an interest in the general operating procedures just like they would for any paid work.
        • knowtheory 16y ago
          Actually the whole mentality that this was just a work of art is the problem. When you do design for applications there are functional and conceptual components to the design. If people are taking your work and buggering up your intent, that's a problem, just the same way it is when someone takes code and alters its behavior without consideration for the code's intent. The experience the designer had, and this conversation just belies the remaining gulf between the two groups.
  • stephenson 16y ago
    I agree, developers and designers must learn to communicate and work together. I dont think this problem only applies to open source, i think a lot of companys have the same problem internal. It would be great to have some type of easy non tech integration to git (github?) for designers to use.
    • cool-RR 16y ago
      One great thing that GitHub allows in this context is editing code files in the browser, and then GitHub stages and commits the file for you.
      • stephenson 16y ago
        I know, but it stil uses all the technical terms and you needs to know gits workflow.
      • jarin 16y ago
        Holy. Crap. I've been using GitHub for a while and I had no idea about this.
  • perlgeek 16y ago
    That experience sucks indeed. I guess there are two lessons to be learned: 1) try to lift the technical burden from the designer. If the designer sends a file as a mail attachment, just add it to a branch of your repo yourself (with permission, hopefully) 2) when programmers see a small bug in a piece of code, they often fix it. Don't assume you can and should do the same with designs. Talk to the designer.
    • neutronicus 16y ago
      Maybe also: have a designer high in the project hierarchy whose responsibility it is to merge design packages.
      • AaronChampagne 16y ago
        Having someone to direct the efforts of other designers would definitely help. Style guides would also help.
  • caseysoftware 16y ago
    That really sucks. I'm sorry that she had such a poor experience. On our project, we've been working really hard to meet designers (and developers and users) where they are. Most of the time when someone asks how to contribute, we list the: * Ideal way, easiest for us; * Less ideal way, maybe a good middle ground; * Difficult for us way, still possible, but likely to take longer to get incorporated; It doesn't always work but it usually gives people a starting point. Also, on the plus side, it leaves little trails & tips all over the place on how they could contribute better. My 0.02.
  • AaronChampagne 16y ago
    This would kill it for me. I've spent my whole adult life learning to use graphite and charcoal, oil paint and clay. Having my entire effort refused because I don't know what a GIT is just doesn't work for me. Having communication barriers like this absolutely would stop me from participating. I have no problem with being asked to redesign a logo over and again. I would love to feel like I belonged to a community and that I mattered. But having a developer jack my work and screw it up because it was easier than asking me to do it would completely scare me away from open source projects.
• wccrawford 16y ago
  Pay them. Don't -ever- expect anyone to contribute for free. When they do, treat them special instead of taking them for granted. That seems like common sense, but that's what I see all the time when it comes to programming projects, open source or not.
  • Charuru 16y ago
    Sounds unfair, developers don't get paid, why do designers do.
    • us 16y ago
      Because developers greatly benefit from participating in open source projects, designers usually don't. That said, developers also make more money than designers do and in a tech centric world, there are more needs for devs than designers. That's why.
      • nir 16y ago
        For most OSS devs, the benefit is having a more interesting portfolio, especially skills they don't get to use in their day job. Wouldn't this work the same way for designers?
    • sp332 16y ago
      Actually, most kernel hackers (and I'll extrapolate wildly and say most open source programmers!) are paid to hack. PDF, relevant bits are in Tables 6, 9, 10, and 12. http://www.linuxfoundation.org/sites/main/files/publications/whowriteslinux.pdf http://www.linuxfoundation.org/sites/main/files/publications...
      • Charuru 16y ago
        If you're talking about os products that are supported by a company, there are a great deal of paid designers, eg mozilla, webkit, android, etc. Just in this context of getting people to 'contribute', we're explicitly referring to projects where the developers do not get paid.
• gidea 16y ago
  Make something beautiful that we all believe in. Then people will support that idea.
• us 16y ago
  Open source works great for developers for many reasons. On the flipside, rarely does it benefit a designer (although not always true). 1. It exposes a programmer's code work for all to see. If it's bad, you get more than just critique. Others can point out what is wrong with the code but even better, they can correct the code or help you see what is wrong. If it's good or great, it makes for an amazing addition to any developers resume for hiring purposes. The same can not be said of designers. Sure they can get feedback and people can often point out what's wrong, but these feedback are often more vague. Rarely do they get a walk through tutorial of how to do things better, actually having someone go in and show them how to fix their design flaw (something that happens a lot on the coding side). Pointing something out and having someone help you solve your design problem are not the same thing. 2. I don't know about others but to me, a designer benefits more from having their own portfolio rather than something that they may have contribute bits and pieces together for a project. As a designer, I don't see the value over my own portfolio which I can get enough critiques on without having to contribute to an open source project. As a developer, I see a need but think in terms of what designers benefit out of this. Open source designs are not the same as open source software in all cases. As an entrepreneur, I hire designers base on independent skill sets which is extremely hard to measure when people are co-designing small projects. 3. Just a comment but it would seem this is geared towards a developer who can't design and want open source designs but where is the benefit the designer is getting out of this. Surely there is a better argument. For the record, I'm not arguing that designers can't benefit at all. I just don't see it outweighing the benefits a developer would get in the same scenario.
  • Sirupsen 16y ago
    It's definitely easier for developers to contribute to open source projects, they can just dig into the code and easily contribute patches. Designing for a project requires a lead to a greater extent to keep the design consistent, whereas programming is more defined and concrete work: "This is wrong, fix it." If the issue no longer occurs after the patch is applied, work is done. Design work is more abstract in that sense. The designer's benefit would defiantly be in having the project in their portfolio. Additionally I don't think too many projects need an entire design team, for most projects one would be sufficient increasing the portfolio value you are talking about. Most people contribute to projects they use, adding functionality they would like to have themselves. I'm sure that is something that would motivate designers too.
• lotides 16y ago
  Why I don't contribute to open-source projects: I feel like a second-class citizen around developers. And I don't want to venture in to the lions den. After all, I "just make things pretty", right? I hate politics. Many open-source projects are a power-struggle with entrenched developers guarding against change. Design is all about visual relationships. Making a change to one small aspect to the design effects everything else. This is very frustrating in an open-source environment, where parts of the design can be changed by the masses compromising the integrity of the whole. Our industry doesn't appreciate it. Employers don't care what open-source projects we've contributed to. It's all about paying clients.
  • benjash 16y ago
    Also. In the UK at least, get designers get paid a lot less. The work they do get paid to do is restrictive and dull. Designers are generally driven by the desire to create and make 'pretty' things. Most spend all day in meetings discussing why that shade of pink isn't good for the 99th design iteration of the same icon. So I highly doubt they would rush to do this kind of work for free. Most design work open source projects need are quite 'boring' from some designers point of view.
    • kstenerud 16y ago
      Counterpoint: Many open source contributors don't find satisfaction in their day jobs. The work they get paid to do is restrictive and dull. Developers are generally driven by the desire to create 'cool' things. Many spend all day in meetings discussing why that API extension isn't good for the 99th design iteration for customer X. And yet many rush to do this kind of work for free. Lots of work open source projects need are quite 'boring' from the technical point of view (documentation, project files, merging, OS integration. etc). So why do people contribute to open source projects? Because they believe in the product and like feeling empowered.
      • AaronChampagne 16y ago
        As a designer I like your counterpoint. If I could work with developers like you're describing I'd be interested. I'm nervous about offering help to a project though, because I'm getting the impression that developers are expected to navigate the community solo and I don't know if I can learn the ropes of the community while making a good design for a project. I've been thinking that maybe a buddy-system might be appropriate for attracting designers.
• replicatorblog 16y ago
  1. Ask for help - I'm a designer that reads HN everyday and I wouldn't know where to look if I wanted to participate in an open source project. Is there a list? The problem is most OS software aside from GIMP/Inkscape doesn't make its way in front of designers often. 2. Make it discrete - What needs to be designed? The entire UI and workflows? The application icon? The internal navigation glyphs? Redesigning an entire app that has tens or hundreds of contributors can be daunting, but getting someone started with something small can be a gateway. 3. Leave it alone - One of the other commenters mentioned how a designer contributed something and then it was overwritten and ruined. Typically you don't want to have dozens of designers all working on a project unless there are fairly strict guidelines to work from. Have a working group at the beginning that can set the UI tone and create guidelines from that. Also a small review committee to review changes is smart, just as they do for code. 4. Version Control for Dummies - Put together a short explanation of how to use the version control system of choice, assuming no knowledge beyond Photoshop. Or find someone on the technical side who can be an intermediary/GIT trainer. The human part of this is very important. Do those things and you should see prettier projects in the future. I know I'd love to get involved, but have no idea where to get started!
  • micrypt 16y ago
    #2 - Perhaps a reasonable starting point would be improving the look of the project's documentation.
    • neutronicus 16y ago
      I remember the Haskell community actually sat down and had a community discussion about laying down design guidelines for the entire Haskell ecosystem (all packages should use so and so a color scheme, this is our logo, this is our font, etc.). I find Haskell sites almost always aesthetically pleasing, and it was probably due to conscious decision by the community to establish design standards. I think OSS in general could benefit from giving a designer such broad-brush authority over an entire ecosystem.
  • greengarstudios 16y ago
    minor typo: discreet -> discrete
• deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
• eagleal 16y ago
  Adding on others (lack of recognition/respect, very difficult to submit changes if you're not a dev, etc). One reason designers usually don't contribute to open source, is because they're paid to improve UX/UI on their commercial competitors. If GIMP/Inkscape had the same UX/UI as the Creative Suite, there wouldn't be market for the latter (this is what designers are paid for, unlike developers). This allows more startup opportunities or companies like Canonical (parent company of Ubuntu) to provide a free and open source product (Canonical actually has dedicated designers).
• cjm 16y ago
  They need control over the portion of the project they're working on, and these portions should be larger rather then smaller. There shouldn't be a committee trying to design something.
• jt2190 16y ago
  OK, I'll bite... The article states that the only way to improve the user experience is to bring in a Designer (loosely defined as somebody who doesn't code.) I'd argue the opposite: Having a programmer who really understands user interfaces and user interaction is the critical, missing piece. Now that I'm in deep, let me go further... A motivated programmer can learn the basics of interaction design very quickly, and get the user interface to a point where it at least doesn't suck.
• Mushon 16y ago
  Replicatorblog's response made very good points. Though I think the FLOSS community should start by appreciating the huge differences between developing code and developing design. I am a designer and a FLOSS guy and I have actually researched this subject a lot, both in practice, in writing and in teaching. The essay I written for Smashing Magazine a few months ago might be relevant in this context, it is called "The Case For Open-Source Design: Can Design By Committee Work?" http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/09/01/the-case-for-open-source-design-can-design-by-committee-work/ http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/09/01/the-case-for-open... I identified three major challenges: 1. Scratching an Itch 2. Granularity 3. Encoding/Decoding I go through a few interesting positive examples for collaborative design processes and then try to propose some tips to making it work. Finally it's about a mix between leadership and openness, but this leadership has to be respected even if it does not translate to algorithmic metrics (like Google's A/B Testing of 41 shades of blue, more: http://stopdesign.com/archive/2009/03/20/goodbye-google.html http://stopdesign.com/archive/2009/03/20/goodbye-google.html) If you prefer to go through this essay as a 20mins video presentation, you can check it here: http://vimeo.com/18761002 http://vimeo.com/18761002 I start at 00:27:50 I realize this is a pretty long and complex answer for what sounds like a simple question, but in my experience this is really revealing the boundaries of the Open Source collaborative process as we know it and it will not change unless we help this model mature.
  • lovskogen 16y ago
    Good research work, the article looks interesting – I'll watch the video too. Looks like you do alot of stuff, what are you working on now?
    • Mushon 16y ago
      Thanks :) I'm actually working with illustrator Galia Offri on another project along the same line as this thread. It is called Wikipedia Illustrated (http://WikipediaIllustrated.org http://WikipediaIllustrated.org) and is trying to address a similar question: "Illustrators, how do we get you guys to contribute to Wikipedia?"
• retlehs 16y ago
  Related article from last July by Kenny Meyers: Where are the open source designers? copywriters? information architects? interface designers? http://thenerdary.net/articles/entry/the_open_source_designers http://thenerdary.net/articles/entry/the_open_source_designe...
• ohkine 16y ago
  I guess the first thing to do is to actually care about it to begin with. I have tried submitting suggestions for improving UIs (and even more trivial bug reports like some element is not centred properly or a text box is 1 px too tall) and it seems like many developers simply don't want to hear about it. They don't have an eye for it, they don't think about how other people might approach the interface, so it just doesn't bother them. They consider your criticisms and suggestions to be nit-picking or pedantry and they either get defensive or they just dismiss them outright. Even if they don't resent them, they often consider them to be so low-priority that they're not worth putting much effort into. The second thing would probably be, like others have said, just to ask -- and part of asking for help is making sure that you are able to actually receive the help. Perhaps partially because of the above, and also because i am not really a programmer (yet!), i have come to be hesitant to even try submitting anything. The process is too complex. I feel very uncomfortable with patches and pull requests and test cases, so please don't make me deal with them. Offer a 'dumbed down' way of submitting our contributions, or, perhaps, make somebody a liaison between people like me and people like your developers. Large open-source projects in particular -- Firefox, GNOME, KDE -- are ones that i have the most interest in contributing to, but they have extremely high barriers of entry for people like me. (To a relative outsider it kind of seems like the design direction of these types of applications/suites is strictly controlled by some high-up cabal of developers, though, so perhaps that is intentional.) edit: wording
• kayoone 16y ago
  Make the project appealing to designers. For instance let the application have themes/skins and have a marketplace where designers can sell their themes on their own. That way designers dont have do deal with the developers and can work on a complete consistent design. Wordpress and others are doing similar things. If a designer has created multiple layouts he could also make one for free to get people interested in the other "premium" ones, so its not that every design has to be a payed one.
• patio11 16y ago
  The same way you get developers to work on OSS -- have their high paying corporate job either order them to do it or ignore their participation in it during work hours.
• OzzyB 16y ago
  Easy, create a "Benevolent Designer For Life" title for your project, then assign to one very talented person. Designers are simply unable to work in committee as stated by others here...
  • jasonlynes 16y ago
    Agree with this one. Try to start the project with a designer. Design is something best consulted from the get-go.
• jarin 16y ago
  Maybe it would be a good idea to put some donations together and actually hire designers on contract. That way, you are less likely to run into the problem of developers overwriting design changes willy-nilly, and you get a higher quality of design work that can last for several rounds of iterations.
• jiipee_2 16y ago
  Many reasons why this is hard. 1) UI design needs to be understood and implemented as a whole. This does not sound good for most of developers. I don't know why. 2) Of course, good UI designer (I wish I am) can create bite-sized chunks - divide UI plan into small parts that are more manageable from the development perspective. UI designer still has to be able to say what parts need to be there before the overall improvement is justified - in other words, when the resulting UI can be evaluated. 3) Developers have always an opinion what is good UI. Many features that make something very good to use for non-tech-people, or easy to learn, do not match into developer view of good UI. 4) Development environment tools, vocabulary and tools are not UI-designer friendly. 5) Dealing the above issues in daily work does not leave energy to have the same problems at free time.
• EGreg 16y ago
  I think that in order to critique design objectively, you need a set of standards and guidelines for design, like the Apple iOS Guidelines. These can be open-sourced themselves, and forked for various projects. Without these guidelines, it will be as tough to tell the designer what to do as it would explaining an obscure C++ error without any reference to C++.
• EGreg 16y ago
  I would also like to point out that when the design is orthogonal to the development, there's lots of beneficial open source design out there. I often use icons with GNU or CC licenses, for example. If only I could find a site with website designs like I can for icons (iconfinder.com, findicons.com) that would be great! I'd get a professional designer to use the open source design as a base and just tweak it.
• VomisaCaasi 16y ago
  I am someone who has got a foot in both of these worlds. Though, I code slowly and I can't really draw either. IMHO, designers don't usually feel any importance of open-source projects because most of them/us are used to things that are aesthetically pleasing, and they would not want to burst their/our bubble. If they we're given a choice between free Linux (assuming Adobe Suite works on it) or OSX, they would be getting OSX because it suits to their world, they would be even paying extra if it was to cost more. Also, they want something that just works and don't really care whether they can see or edit the source, since their coding experience usually ends with HTML and CSS, hence the apathy. I've worked with quite a broad range of websites and the less control I had over my work, the less I enjoyed it. Solution? If you're able to find a designer for your project, make him feel special by taking him as an equal member of the team and give him full control of the design side (aesthetics). More so, let him start from the scratch. Although, arguing about functionality (UI and UX), which has logic in it, should be encouraged, you don't want to offend him by saying his designs look bad, because a criticism coming from a programmer is as bad as it gets. Coder's blogs are usually coloured dark blue or green, that tells a lot. That's also the reasons why most designers hate working for Google. One hour meetings whether a line should be 1 or 2px thick? If you don't really like what he is doing, ditch him.
  • jamesteow 16y ago
    I disagree with some of this. I think a designer should have the skin to take some criticism, even from a programmer. When my programmer co-founder critiques me, I sometimes think, "shit, I must've really screwed up for him to mention something." And yes, I do think it results in better work as long as there is justification. I think that generally, one cannot be too precious about aesthetics unless there is a clear vision with core principles.
• jbk 16y ago
  I really wish I knew how to get great designers... VLC is a product, that is widely used, usable (not the mac version, though), but it is extremely ugly. It is quite hard to get designers to help us (redesigning all the buttons for example) for quite many reasons. The biggest reason is that we don't speak the same language. Many designers don't understand the criticism that usually comes around with each modification in open source project. Many developers don't understand how to speak to designers in a polite way (they think they speak normally, but it isn't perceived as such). Also, many (not all of them) designers don't understand the difficulties of usability, and sometimes mistakes it with "shiny". Usability of a desktop application is way more complex than a website, and the current trend of "removing functionalities" is not always welcomed by developers... However, I don't loose hope :D
  • mitjak 16y ago
    This brings up the same recurring theme: lack of understanding or correct communication between the "art" and "science" departments. I am not an expert on the matter but two things I've noticed about a working designer-programmer workflow are: * "Glue" team members. The company I've worked for always had at least two staff members who were a bit of both, and could basically plan out and convey ideas from one team to the other. * Assumption of expertise. Each group would trust the other when it comes to both design and programming and no doubting would take place. In case of a conflict, a programmer could tell the designer why a certain design would not work out well citing particular technological reasons; similarly, given a question by the programmer, a designer would explain why a particular design is laid out the way it is, why the buttons are blue etc. Given the conflict resolution scheme, a product builds up based on mutual trust and communication of ideas between the two parties.
  • abcd_f 16y ago
    Great designers are in demand. Time is their most valuable asset, so in order to get a piece of this asset they must be offered a form of compensation. They clearly do not need to be designing for "would look great on your portfolio" nor they are likely to be enticed by the "gratitude of the masses". The only non-monetary compensation that works is to make them genuinely interested in helping -- and that if you think about it is the exact reason why devs give free time to open source projects. If it's not interesting, they leave. So as harsh as it may sound the answer to your question is that you just cannot get great designers. There's virtually nothing you can offer them in return. If you do manage to get someone on board, do shield them from the "community". Work one on one and put all your weight behind his designs when they are made public. Leet hackorz that are so vocal on many O/S forums and mailing lists can easily demotivate even Mother Teresa in a matter of few replies. HTH, feel free to vote me down now :) (edit) On a second thought VLC might be one of few projects that can attract a designer because of its high-visibility nature. Yet the point remains - designers are easily demotivated, way easier than developers, so retaining them is a major challenge.
• rimantas 16y ago
  There is a problem: for a meaningful contribution designers must be involved from the very beginning (hence "designer" not "decorator").
  • wolfgke 16y ago
    Then the rational choice for designers would be to contribute to open source projects that are in a very early state. But as far as I know, they don't do so. So we have a contradiction.
• tzs 16y ago
  The same question could be asked about documentation writers. Most of the reasons given here as to why it is hard to get designers apply to documentation writers, too. For open source games, the same question could also be asked for music composers, and again most of the same answers apply. It might better to ask why is it so easy to get coders to contribute.
  • FiddlerClamp 16y ago
    Yes - for example I'd love to keep up my tech writing and marcomm skills by contributing to open source projects, but I have no idea where to start.
    • flink 16y ago
      I don't know if this is what you were looking for, but one option would be the Fedora project. General: http://fedoraproject.org/en/join-fedora http://fedoraproject.org/en/join-fedora Specific Areas: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join#Content_Writer https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join#Content_Writer https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join#Designer https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join#Designer One of the proposed long term goals (still going through the approval process) for the Fedora project is to lower the barrier of entry for new members (Not a great link but one of the better ones that I could find: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:Board_meeting_2010-12-13#GOAL_.234:_It_is_extraordinarily_easy_to_join_the_Fedora_community_and_quickly_find_a_project_to_work_on. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:Board_meeting_2010-12...) DISCLOSURE: I do work for Red Hat on the Fedora project but my interest in open source is also personal. I suggested this because it seemed appropriate and I'm familiar with it.
      • FiddlerClamp 16y ago
        Thanks -- I'm going to apply! I have always had a Linux flavor on dual-boot on my PC for learning and tinkering. I'm more about end-user and customization documentation rather than admin/install, but hopefully they can use me!
• recurrie 16y ago
  Reframe the question: How would you get designers to start open source projects? The open source world is pretty much structured around serving the needs of those who can code. In the field I work in, designers and developers have equal standing, and need to create a middle ground of shared workflow, technology and design processes that balance development and design. In most open source projects, there are too many barriers to entry (real or perceived) for designers to see themselves as participants. Everything from version control systems that don't provide any real benefit for visual designers to project leaders that see design as "eye candy" all reduce the appeal to designers. Remember, too, that designers have loads of options if they want to work for free. You know all those "Build a Facebook clone over the weekend, it will look great on your resume" jobs on Craigslist? Designers get that kind of pitch ("Design us something for free; it will look great in your portfolio") constantly. Open source projects looking to recruit designers need convey some tangible benefit to participating. In the design world, peer recognition doesn't come out of working on open source projects that their designer colleagues have never heard of. Every designer I know of will jump at the opportunity to do really great work, for free if necessary. Looking at the open source projects I'm familiar with, few of these look like the kinds of places where a designer would expect to create really great work.
  • flink 16y ago
    That's an interesting question. I also wonder how you would get designers to start open source projects without getting the opposite of a "developer-centric" project where developers are the second class citizens. Can you (or others) elaborate a bit more on what a place where a designer could expect to create really great work would look like? Is it more of a personal aesthetic thing (something that is personally interesting)? Is it related to some of the other points in this thread (unfriendly tools, gruff face to the community, lack of control etc.)?
    • recurrie 16y ago
      That a tough one - it's always easier to identify a problem than craft a solution. Here's a shot: * Projects should include screenshots or other visuals (no matter what their state of completion) on project pages. Browsing the usual Github page shows no visuals at all. Not every project is going to be heavily visually oriented, but most of the project pages I see look like a giant "Designers not wanted" sign. * An environment where design can happen collaboratively. The "design thinking" ethos requires understanding what the problem is before trying to solve it. To really involve designers, some sort of sandbox where ideas can be expressed as something other than code, feature requests, bug fixes or "64x64px.png goes here." Would be ideal - a way to say "I see this working like this..." in a way a visual designer can express. Lots of discussion happens via chat, etc, but pretty hard to access if you're already feeling excluded. * Something recognizable as a team structure. If projects need a designer, a project page noting an unfilled slot on the team would be ideal, along with some details. Icon designer? UX specialist? Copywriter? What do you need? * Integrating rapid prototyping tools for design exploration. One of the tough tasks I find in interaction design is to get a feel for how a complex system is going to work without building it. I've see everything from Flash to Filemaker Pro used to build working models, to then be built out in another tool. Photoshop comps are great, but not a great way to simulate a lot of complex interaction models. If designers and developers are going to speak the same language, it's probably not going to be code. I teach at a university of the visual arts, and I've often wondered about finding a way to engage students in open source projects, but to be honest, I've always been to fearful of what the outcome might be to really push this. My worry is that for a lot of developers, a logo and a few icons is all they are looking for. Fair enough, but not terribly attractive to the types of designers that projects really need. Finally, designers need to understand what a big deal software is. You almost never see application design (web, desktop or mobile) represented in the big design award annuals, and the types of things that do get in tend to be gimmicky, Flash-driven web sites for consumer products.
• jrwoodruff 16y ago
  During my day job I play the lone designer in an organization built from day one with only software engineers. I suspect the problems that I face there are similar to the problems faced by designers in OSS. 1. Communication. Developers use a completely different language than designers. If I come in talking about alignment, developers are thinking 'right left or center justified?' When developers start talking about recursion, I go to sleep. 2. Attitude. Often developers seem to think of designers as 'artsy' types, and design as 'nice-to-have,' which is to imply not necessary. 3. Attitude. Designers often get emotionally attached to their work and get discouraged or give up when someone disagrees, has a different idea or wants to go another direction. 4. I can do it myself. A LOT of developers - particularly less experienced ones - think design is something they can, and are, successfully doing themselves. After all, it's just pixels on a screen, who needs photoshop, right? 5. Small changes. Developers often make small changes to designs. 5px extra padding here, no margin there. Blue is blue, right? We'll just use that 10x10 icon the designer did for that page for this 25x25 icon we need on this page. This drives designers insane. 6. Eyecandy. This goes to a lack of understanding of the design profession; many think design is just slick icons and pretty colors. Developers who have worked with talented designers know that designers can improve entire systems, helping streamline work flows and adapt the system to actual users. 7. Bad designers. Oh yea, there's -a few- of us out there that just picked up GIMP yesterday and think a 600 x 600px favicon should be fine. Even designers capable of really good work may not understand why a 2400x1600 image cannot be used thumbnail-size on the page. This is sad, but I've seen it. 8. Lack of trust. Developers may have worked with bad designers in the past. Most likely they have, actually. They'll likely limit the designers interaction to making icons and css rather than involving them in the system design and planning. Designers may not give as much as they could because they don't trust the developers to value their input or even understand and execute their contributions well. Of course, that's not to say all projects are this way, and in fact, when I've been involved in projects from early-on, this is very much not the case. However, I've run into the above issues in my professional career more than once, working face-to-face with people. Trying to make the relationship work online, in projects as distributed as OSS projects are, that's very difficult. But I think it can be done. For distributed design to work, designers need to be brought on board from the beginning, in the planning phases. The initial designer or designers would have to be responsible for creating a clear vision, clear guidelines, and a well-documented style for future contributors to follow. All contributions would have to adhere to those guidelines, and developers would have to be as adept at spotting violations as designers. Part of the problem here is also making designers aware of projects to work on. Designers generally join different message boards (if they join message boards at all), read different blogs and generally don't run in the same circles as developers, possibly with HN being one of the exceptions. I'm not sure how to change that...
• mediamaker 16y ago
  Im a designer and I would be happy to contribute to open source projects. contact johnatjohncozendotcom if interested.
• savoy11 16y ago
  We don't get anyone to contribute to open sours project, not only designers, but also business type, docs guys etc. Because, most of these guys actually have a life and a family to feed and will not do suck enormous stupidity to dabble with open source, let alone contribute to it.
• deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
• englishVoodoo 16y ago
  Beyond the obvious difficulties in the very nature of git and stuff like that to be very technical. Without knowing to much about open source projects it really feels it's such a tremendous difference in scope. As a developer, you can contribute small patches, bits here and there or step in deeper and create new features or improvements within the current feature set. As a designer, the bits and pieces option really is no option. Design can't be applied like that. It needs to be applied to the entire project in a consistent manner. Both visuals and user experience thinking. This makes it a far bigger commitment, something I imagine not everybody is willing to do.
• yangman 16y ago
  I'm surprised no one has brought up how difficult it often is to incorporate design changes into an existing project unless it has been developed with such accommodations from day 1. Even a seemingly simple software project can be monstrously complex under the hood, and something as innocent as "this button should be larger than the rest" can mean weeks and months of proofing, coding, and testing. (e.g. Firefox 3's back button) Whether a change comes in the form of code fixes, documentation improvement, refactoring, design changes, or infrastructural modifications, the burden of understanding the potential scope of damage and doing the actual work is always, always on the contributor. Convincing another to take on the work on their behalf is always a possibility, but it should not be hard to see why design changes proposed through such a channel will often be pushed to the back of the queue, unless for some dire need. Designer or coder, there is no excuse for not doing due diligence in making sure a contribution is a good contribution. Looking at the discussion so far, there appears to be at least some consensus that non-trivial effort above and beyond the (hopefully) expected hand-holding must be dedicated to designers in order for them to become good contributors. And, in corollary, the natural conclusion is that it's unrealistic to expect designers to put in the necessary effort to become good contributors on their own. Following from the above, the more crucial questions, I think, are "How do we convince projects that they should go out of their way to attract designers", and, "Do you really need designers? Really, really, need them?"
• johnthedebs 16y ago
  I think the root issue preventing more designers from working on open source projects is that, unlike development, design doesn't improve when the work is distributed. Development is modular – pieces can be added, removed, or changed out for other pieces. Several developers can work on the same project at the same time and not step on each others' toes (esp. thanks to modern version control). This works great with the open source model. Design, on the other hand, benefits from being unified and consistent. The best-designed projects have one designer, or a small group of designers working together closely. This doesn't work well with open source at all. This becomes pretty obvious when you compare Mac systems to Linux systems. Until this issue is resolved (by, eg, open source projects bringing on dedicated designers) the symptoms are unlikely to go away.
  • jamesteow 16y ago
    "The best-designed projects have one designer, or a small group of designers working together closely. This doesn't work well with open source at all." This is a pretty important point that gets overlooked. I think designers can help make something more intuitive and generally more readible but if we're talking about a cohesive person, it usually has to come from one person with a vision for the project.
• pontifexmaximus 16y ago
  This whole discussion just makes me as a designer want to go and help some project. As a developer, I've already helped a few opensource projects. What's missing? A centralized location for designers to meet developers. github is unfortunately designer-unfriendly. It's developer oriented, and code-centric. Fixing github into having a design aspect will surely repair this. I once tried to help out interpals.net. The usability of the site is non-existent, and the visual elements look like they were made by a four-year-old. Thus, I've come up with sketches and UI elements and gave it to the founder. He was amazed and seemed eager to work with me. At the end wanted someone more experienced. By that, he meant someone who can code, not only design. He wanted a developer. At the time I wasn't one. Beggars can't be choosers. His site continues to be dead-ugly. I really want to help anything because I need to exercise design as much as coding.
• Entlin 16y ago
  It's all down to different cultures. Open Source projects, the way they currently are, are driven by coders - version control, bugtrackers, IRC etc - all geeky things. Designers work in different environments: personal discussions, meetings, illustrator, photoshop, other web communities (like dribble and obscure sections at flickr). If you ask a designer to add stuff to your repository, you're asking him to adapt to your way. Most designers aren't going to learn git. To embrace designers means that you include them in your processes and tools. And let them in on strategic discussions - that's where good design is most often lacking in OSS. If you continue with a Codeocracy where only check-ins are valued and the guy with 100k lines of written code is king, you're not going to convince many designers to help you with their free time.
• endergen 16y ago
  I believe it's because open source projects are designed to be modular. Design on the other hand is holistic. So it's hard to integrate design into an existing project unless it's an open source project such as a CRM where basically designers can make nice skins of the entire project.
  • AaronChampagne 16y ago
    Fuck that. Good design IS modular design. If your designer isn't following best practices like modular design then they are NOT good designers. Learning to work in non-destructive modular ways was one of the most important lessons for me when I transitioned from art to design.
    • endergen 16y ago
      Hahaha. No....fuck.....you! :) I agree with what you are saying, I don't think it contradicts what I intended to articulate. I was trying to get across that dropping a modular piece of code such as say a Database system(Like MySQL) into a project gives you a huge chunk of functionality which you can then build on top of. I can't think of the equivalent for Art, except for widget sets or something along those lines. Or a grid/layout template that doesn't require you to then go and have to update any existing art to mesh well with the new art. Now to be fair: you can come up with the equivalent of the MySQL situation where say you start the project with say a widget set and just match it's style moving forward. I could probably match all my concrete coding examples with a modular art project but I think there are two issues that in general going to come up: 1) A lot Graphic Designers are not to strong at building modular art as it requires a more rigid process. There are exceptions of course, but we are talking about in general why there aren't as many Graphic Designers contributing to Open Source projects. (Wordpress though is a good example of where there are tonnes of Themes provided by Designers). 2) Reusing a popular Design can make your project look more derivate than unique. Where as with code this is less the case. Though with popular Widget sets such as the design by Sofa for Cappuccino (http://ajaxian.com/archives/cappuccino-07-aristo-ui-theme-engine-nib2cib-and-more http://ajaxian.com/archives/cappuccino-07-aristo-ui-theme-en...) is a good example of Great design that maybe benefits from this familiarity as it's easier to grasp what widgets do when you've used other Apps using them.
• joelrunyon 16y ago
  The hard part here is the nature of the craft. Developers have rules. Code has syntax. Everyone follows the same rules and code comes out the same. One developer can pick up where another left off. It's very clean cut. Designers are different. There are "rules" of design, but each designer is different and have their own styles. That's not a bad thing, but when you get multiple (hundreds, even) of different developers with styles and no "strict" rules of design, it can make for a very hodge-podge project that...well...looks like 100 different people designed it [Not a designer or developer but I work with both and serve as a "translator" between the two]
  • joelrunyon 16y ago
    maybe the solution is a set of design rules for project/community/development that everyone agrees to.
• Stormbringer 16y ago
  It's a power thing. Developers will (grudgingly) share power with equal or better programmers than themselves, but the gnu version of the open source movement is explicitly designed to put all the power into the programmers hands, and any non-programmers should "just learn to program". The are two other things that programmers tend to do: (1) we hate redundancy (2) if something is obvious to a programmer, he thinks it is obvious to everyone else that that is the way it should be done (despite a simple survey of his peers revealing probably 4-6 different ways of achieving exactly the same result). Programmers believe that their way is better than everyone else's and that it is intuitive as well (well, it was 'intuitive' to one guy on the team (ie me), and I'm 'smart' so that must be the best and most intuitive way of doing it, right?) Unfortunately, good UI design has enormous amounts of redundancy built into it, and that if there is only one way of doing something, it is actually anti-intuitive. A design where the user can try 3 things out and the third one works will be hailed as a paragon of intuitiveness. One where it takes 10-20 tries to get the magic combination will be viewed as having a horrible UI. There is also a relationship between how easy it is to do simple things and how the user perceives the UI. Programs which make it hard (ie go read a couple of hundred man pages in order to figure out the flags you need) even to do simple things are viewed as bad, even if it turns out that the same amount of difficulty can also achieve amazingly difficult things. Basically what it boils down to is that in order to fix the design of an open source project, you would essentially have to fork it. And having forked it and fixed it, the high priests of the programmer cult will despise your efforts because there is too much redundancy.
• deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
• tealtan 16y ago
  The best way to get designers involved is to ask them the question, "What don't you like about this software? How would YOU change it?" This shows that you respect their input and are inviting them as a peer to think about the project both visually and on a systems planning level. I'd also recommend having a design lead who can bring on other designers as needed. The design lead should be responsible for making all design decisions and ensuring consistency. He should also be regularly communicating his decisions and reasoning to the community. (Mark Boulton did great working with the Drupal community, for example.) When you give feedback to designers, try not to say "Take this out." or "Make this bigger. Or change this color." Tell them why (this is very important) you want something changed, and let the designer come up with a solution. And trust them to make the right one.
  • tealtan 16y ago
    Asking them that question also gives you an idea of whether they understand the project and if their ideas for the design align with your own. But don't ask them to whip together a "quick" mockup, that's considered spec work and is frowned upon in the design community. No design work is both "quick" and good.
• sgdesign 16y ago
  I think nobody has mentioned the most obvious reason: 90% of open-source projects are used by other developers, not by designers. Making it hard to contribute can be a barrier, but it's not the number one reason. Designers redesign apps, icons, and sites all the time just for fun, even if they know that their contributions have no chance whatsoever of being used. Designers want to contribute to something that they care about, and the simple reality is that a majority of open source projects are made to appeal to developers, not designers. In other words, if you want designers to contribute to your open source project, make it something that they will use and be passionate about.
• ary 16y ago
  Just as you expect that non-programmers have no clue about code, you must accept that non-designers (you) have no clue about (user interface / user interaction / graphic) design (keep reading). Obviously this isn't an absolute, and there are exceptions to this rule. The most important thing I can get across is this; End users do not, and will not, think like you do about your software (Read 10x). The reason you must get perspective outside your own is because yours is tainted beyond repair when looking at your own project. So, what can you do to make your open source project more appealing to a designer? 1) Let go of preconceived bias when it comes to your UI / look-and-feel. Someone more interested in the visual appearance and usability of your application is going to want to make changes to the workflow. Just as you test your code, test your design to make sure the designer's assumptions hold up. As a president once said, "Trust but verify." 2) Develop a clear understanding of where your designers implementation responsibilities end and yours begin (and vice versa). Which is to say, know their limits, and know your own. If they don't know how to integrate their work into your project then either help them or find a third party that can. If you don't know how to integrate their work into your project then have them help or find a third party that can. Focus on your strengths. Nothing is more dissatisfying that seeing your work butchered. 3) Check the ego at the door/keyboard/whatever. This applies to everyone involved in any way, shape, or form. Objectivity is the ideal, but lets be realistic. Personally I know more people who have had bad experiences volunteering / interacting with open sources projects than good (including myself). While this is anecdotal I think it's still important. Don't mistake popularity with success, and don't let popularity become validation for your lack of social skills. The people at the other end of your emails, IMs, IRC channels, etc are just that... people. The golden rule gets turned up to 11 when someone decides to take some of their free time and donate it to your cause. This is hardly comprehensive, but I think it touches on a few points in ways I have yet to see in this thread. Keep doing your good work.
• lwhi 16y ago
  I'd suggest it might be more worthwhile thinking in terms of development teams and UX teams. I think the appeal of working on an OSS is that a developer gets to hone their skills and work collaboratively. It's a way to contribute (give back), to gain experience and to gain kudos. I don't think the same collaborative aspect works as easily for design - because design problems are perhaps less easily worked on iteratively as a group. UX, as a discipline, involves problems which can be solved collaboratively - and lends itself to team work. Design that's born from UX research tends to solve problems which have been more clearly defined from the outset.
• smag 16y ago
  Here's what it would take to get me to make bring my product design/interaction design skills to open source software: * Easy way to and keep track of 'what projects are underway now and which need HCI or UX expertise'? * Way to speak with the team over email or IM about what UX challenges there are, and learn the constraints * Confidence that designers will be adequately recognized for their contributions Reading the thread here makes me realize that we're all so specialized--and this is a big part of the problem. UX designers need to learn to use a command line, need to learn to do at least some coding. Likewise, software engineers (including open source contributors) need to become more discerning about the basic principles of human-computer interaction and user interface design (not just visual styling). Once both roles start to become generalizing specialists, better collaborations will just happen.
• armandososa 16y ago
  Back when I discovered CakePHP I was just a print designer trying to become a web developer. I was so thankful for the work of the CakePHP foundation that I felt really bad for not being able to contribute back (I had no money, and no real programming skills). So, when they called out for help to design their official website I jumped in and they gave me the opportunity to contribute with my design. As a happy side effect, that design gave me a lot of exposition so I could finally left my dayjob as a print designer and start my career as a freelance web dev. It's fair to say that the link on CakePHP's footer brought food to my table for 4+ years.
• sfled 16y ago
  Seems like by "designers" it means you would like contributions from "graphic designers", yeah? Just my humble, but designers, like programmers, can grow as their knowledge and experience encompasses more techniques. From drawing to composition to color theory to typography to XHTML to CSS to Javascript to PHP to Perl to ASP.NET/C# etc, et, al. So what kind of designer were you looking for? BTW, from a visual design point of view, the classic education is to first use a monospace typeface at a single size, then use other typefaces and multiple fonts and weights, then get to the fancy curves and Photoshop bullshit. But honestly if the designer couldn't make it work in Courier, they may want to consider another career. So there you go. Did you want gratuitous eye candy or did you want a talented and educated artist who also knew booleans, conditionals and how to hit up a database?
• EnderMB 16y ago
  I'm a developer with decent design skills and I would love to work on an open-source project in both roles, although I have looked on CodePlex a number of times to see what I could join. I rarely ever see any design openings, and more often than not a lot of solutions in project repositories don't even compile. It's easy to say that designers are needed, but anyone who has spent time in a design community of any kind would know that there are loads of designers out there that would love to get their stuff out there. I'd love to do design work for a decent open-source project while I get used to the code base to help with the development; I'm willing to bet that many others are in the same boat.
• tomelders 16y ago
  I think a lot of designers would love to work on open source projects, but I'm a designer and a developer myself and even I feel that the creative input wouldn't be taken seriously. If an OS project assigned a Creative Director, that may help lead the way for other designer to join a project. Also, Source Forge and GutHub and the like aren't going to cut the mustard for Designers. There needs to be somewhere like them, but tailored for design.
• sambeau 16y ago
  The biggest battle designers have when working with developers is getting across the idea that design is not "how something looks", but, "how something works". This means that, ideally, the design process comes before the coding process. It can be very dispiriting for a designer to come into a project somewhere in the middle to find that major design decisions have been made and cannot be overturned. It is common, for instance, to find open-source UI that mimics the data structures of the code rather than the foibles of a human brain. If a designer were to join an open source project they would be seen as "trying to change everything", "dumbing down" and "trying to take over". Which would, in a way, be true - and probably exactly what was needed. I've often wondered if we designers could start open-source projects: start designing, publish & document our designs, release our work to the open-source community and wait to see if anyone bites. I have seen this happen before and it was amazingly successful: Coverflow. Andrew Coulter Enright, a designer and artist, published a design for "how iTunes should work" on his website. Jonathan del Strother, a Mac developer, bit and published an implementation. Cover Flow was purchased by Apple Inc. in 2006. I'd love to see something similar happen with a larger open-source app. Any designers out there want to join me in starting a site for exactly this kind of workflow? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Coulter_Enright http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Coulter_Enright http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_Flow http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_Flow
• cancelbubble 16y ago
  How does the designer benefit from helping? I would imagine that "design" help in open source comes after the fact. The designer "pretties" things up with some gradients and rounded corners - basically decoration. Problem is, real design doesn't work like that so you're going to have a hard time getting a real designer involved in a community they're probably not active in, for free. Real design begins before a single line of code is written, they want to be part of driving decisions and solving problems.
• adev 16y ago
  I'm seeing a lot of the replies here are only thinking about designers working on the final visuals of a project. While, yes, a designer might make the icon better than a developer, what about the actual interaction processes that designers often define? Those can be system level changes that need developers to do, which means the designers need to be working along side, or ahead of developers, not after. Too often when I try open source software I see just a default list of options that really makes no sense, or I often see the developers trying to accommodate every need that might exist, resulting in overly complex user interfaces. It takes someone (a designer usually) with knowledge of human interaction to know when a toolbar with multiple tabs works or when to keep it simple. Without doing this, designers are (in an overly simplistic description) just applying colors to existing boxes. To get involved, Designers need a clear place to find projects to help on, and a clear way to help on projects -- as designers aren't about to open source code, install it on their own system and then begin work on the project. I consider myself to pretty knowledgeable in the tech community and work as a full stack designer/developer, yet I have absolutely no clue where or how to get involved design-wise with any open source project. There's no "design" section on github or google code that I've ever seen :)
• Nadienka 16y ago
  That is a great topic of conversation and potential source of something new coming out. I am an interaction designer myself and wondered about this issue more than once. Designers are always seeking for some projects to do even with no money return. There are several platforms that work based on this sharing skills principles, but often money based. Usually seen as a contest platform where the client requests and users (designers) responds buy uploading their work. Examples of this are Crowdspring www.crowdspring.com and in a smaller scale DesignRider www.designrider.com. Why not build a sharing platform like these for open-sources projects? For a best results return, the briefing (instructions, guidelines, rules, project intention description, for instance) should be clear and precise. For instance, by specifying the format in which you want your design work will already scan designers skills and give you more to the point results. Of course, conversation is always welcome, a mailing list /forum in such platform to discuss and share knowledge between developers and designers cannot hurt either. "Designers are scared of developers. Developers speak a foreign language, they are like aliens." Simon Hørup Eskildsen. I don't think is there such a big barrier between designers and programmers or developers. It is time to drop that assumption. A web based platform that gets both working on several open sources projects is a solution to consider and that might bring more responses that you can think of.