7 ms·

WTF Is Wrong with Open Source Communities?

10 points by chhum 5y ago

fivelessminutes 5y ago
> This lack of diversity is unacceptable. Open source contributors self-select. They have to put time in, usually for $0 and often without thanks. I don't know of any FOSS project who asks, or cares, about race or sex or anything else except code, or if the project is ill-maintained, at least your patch will get just as ignored regardless of your background. The article reads like some (white) Karen who wants to talk to FOSS' manager, there isn't any. If you think there should be more people sending patches or running FOSS projects, bring them, if their contributions are any good non-broken projects will be glad for them.
- normdeplume2 5y ago
  I'm not sure if you read the article, but literally every one of your points is clearly addressed Open source contributors self-select. > Yes, and if the environment is hostile to people of colour, or specific genders, they obviously won't contribute. They have to put time in, usually for $0 and often without thanks > Right. As the author states in a comment below the piece: "Open source work should be paid work, and, until it is, it shouldn't be a requirement to getting a job -- that only increases inequity when so much of the unpaid care work falls on those already minoritized by tech and open source." I don't know of any FOSS project who asks, or cares, about race or sex or anything else except code, or if the project is ill-maintained, at least your patch will get just as ignored regardless of your background. > So how do you explain all the research that tells you this isn't true? Such as this piece - https://peerj.com/preprints/1733/ https://peerj.com/preprints/1733/ - cited in the article.
  - raxxorrax 5y ago
    The data of the study doesn't reflect these conclusions to be honest. The most simple one, that women engage in far fewer numbers explains all observable effects in my opinion. Also the users the data observes are found on Github and Google+. This is a insufficient data if you write about the open source community in general. The implicit bias test the authors used to certify themselves have problems justifying their relevance.
    - chhum 5y ago
      "The most simple one, that women engage in far fewer numbers explains all observable effects in my opinion." > Well yes. But why do you think that is? If OSS is, in general, hostile to woman (and I would suggest that it is) than obviously fewer of them engage with it. Of course that same problem is reflected all the way up the chain - fewer woman become programmers because computing is hostile to them - a trend which starts at school and has been the case since about the 1980s.
  - fivelessminutes 5y ago
    > I'm not sure if you read the article > As the author states in a comment Ie, not in the article. Can you elaborate on how that paper 'tells me' my own lived experience the last 20 years maintaining FOSS projects and offering patches 'isn't true'? That sounds arrogant on your part. The paper tries to guess gender from github nyms and profile pics, and looking for google + integration, this seems like a red flag to me. I couldn't guess gender or sex from that, especially considering regional differences, like anime pictures for profile pics, unless it was explicitly telling me in the name. What they may instead be partitioning is the aggressiveness / confidence of the nym and its presentation, which corrolates later to what happens at the first hurdle for their patches. For simple bug fixes, patches are typically acceptable right away. For more complex fixes and new features, some negotiation is needed with the maintainer as to how it should be done, there are often several ways that are reasonable, but eg, only one or two that align with future plans for the code. If the maintainer asks for a redo, a good proportion of contributors give up, they have exhausted their initial energy. Similarly, when asked for tests, or presented with considerations for other supported platforms the contributor doesn't care about, more give up. It requires extra confidence to approach the maintainer about preferred ways to do the patch before just starting on it. The maintainers are sometimes assholes (I am pretty sure, to everyone). I think it's very hard to unpick why patches didn't go anywhere unless you follow the story of each, certainly you need abnormal energy and confidence to get started and get over the hurdles for anything nontrivial.
- eesmith 5y ago
  > Open source contributors self-select. You are looking only at the last step into becoming a FOSS contributor. There are other selection filters you have missed, but which are touched on in the essay. The article mentions "the vast majority of open source contributors are either volunteers or work for sponsoring organizations." I believe that is correct. Those who work for sponsoring organizations aren't quite "self-selected", in that their employer is also involved, if only to grant copyright permission. I wouldn't say that all of the Google staff working on the open-source part of Chrome are self-selected open source contributors. Would you? And don't forget the article mentions a Fortune analysis that "the world’s biggest companies, who are the frequent sponsors of high-profile OSS projects, are still lagging behind in diverse hires." That's a selection filter right there. Even if all FOSS contributors are self-selected, there are clearly systemic biases in who is able to make a decision. Consider the mentioned "unpaid care work", which includes raising children and taking care of the elderly. Many societies regard this as a woman's responsibility, so even if two people have to decide to spend their volunteer time working on open source vs. doing unpaid care work, a man in those cultures may find it easier to "self-select" open source development than a woman might. > If you think there should be more people sending patches or running FOSS projects, bring them Someone working two jobs to support a family has little free time for open source development. Someone working part-time at a job and full-time child minding also has little free time. OTOH, someone with money can have a job with the evenings off, can pay for a babysitter, can order food instead of cooking, etc. As a result, poor people are underrepresented in open source software development if only because of the lack of available free time. Historic racism in the US contributes to the modern correlation between wealth and the social construct of "race". Blacks, for example, are more likely to be poor, and therefore less likely to be in a position to be able to "self-select" in the first place. Personally, I see Universal Basic Income as a way to get a lot of good open source developers, by increasing the number of people who are able to volunteer. > I don't know of any FOSS project who asks, or cares, about race or sex or anything else except code Have you missed the last 10 years of discussions about FOSS projects that have actively removed the use of "master/slave"? That sure sounds like FOSS projects which (at least claim to) care about race. Here too you are looking only the end point of the process - someone who contributes to a FOSS project. Those who have removed "master/slave" argue that such terms may inhibit people from becoming a FOSS contributor in the first place. Similarly, a FOSS project with a Discord project discussion channel where the developers regular post pictures of sexy women might disproportionately inhibit contributions from women. Even if they are completely wrong, my point is that there are many selection filters beyond "does a project accept or reject code based on the contributors race, sex, etc."
4chub 5y ago
Maybe we need an anonymous answer to Github ("4chub") such that all contributions are anonymous and vetted on merit only. No more Karen to complain that the people giving away their work for free are too this or not enough that.
lukaszwojtow 5y ago
WTF is this junk? You're free to bring contributions from 'women and other gender minorities' to any OSS.
coldtea 5y ago
>This lack of diversity is unacceptable. To whom? You can always start your own FOSS project and include more varied people/genders. You cannot dictate what others do on their own time/dime as a passion project/hobby. Did these people attempted to get into OSS and failed, were not welcomed, etc? That would be a criterion that makes sense. Else it's either a non-issue (they simply elect not to, for whatever cultural or other reasons) or an upstream issue (e.g. educational). People feeling not welcome in some FOSS project can always start their own project (and be as inclusive as they wish). If Lynne Jolitz could get into FOSS in 1992, others can do it in the much more sensitive and inclusive tech/general culture of 2021.
- skitout 5y ago
  >To whom? ... or why ? 1) Diversity of people, of experiences and point of views can boost a project (this includes "minorities", genders, countries of origin... but it is not limited to this). 2) Being able to attract more people to contribute can boost a project. So if you care about an OSS project or OSS in general, that makes sense to think about those issues. On a bigger picture, people working (often for free) on OSS are doing an amazing job that has a big impact in the world we are living. In a more societal point of view, it also make sense to 1) try to include the views and experience of many different people on project that will have an impact on everybody 2) find ways that more people and more diverse people contribute Everybody can contribute on an OSS. But there are things preventing some people to contribute and that we can ameliorate. There are ways to make more people and more diverse people to contribute or to contribute more.
  - coldtea 5y ago
    >1) Diversity of people, of experiences and point of views can boost a project (this includes "minorities", genders, countries of origin... but it is not limited to this). 2) Being able to attract more people to contribute can boost a project. Maybe, but that's an abstract idea about society/culture, not some natural law that applies to everything. The maintainers of a project don't have to necessarily agree, or want to dillute their own perspectives. FOSS is often about personal (or small team) passion and/or a BDFL driving it, not about "design by commitee" (and the commitee being diverse can make things worse). Many FOSS projects want or could use less "points of view" and more singular vision and focus.
raxxorrax 5y ago
Since there are no barriers in open source, it has to be a self-inflicted problem. You can start just now. Pick a project or start your own. Not every developer contributes either. Aside from that anonymous open source contributions are plentiful, so maybe it isn't even true. I don't believe any barrier aside from the technical one exists here or even can exist because there is no authority that could keep anyone out. > women and other gender minorities Women aren't a gender minority. > Enforced codes of conduct matter I don't think so, you want OSS to cater to you. You sell yourself to companies that want to enforce compliance and you are the useful vehicle. This is why you get animosity, not because of your sex. > has found that women strongly consider open source codes of conduct before making their first contributions I dismiss this because there is no evidence at all. > Open source leadership You didn't even understand the concept. > Zainab Daodu says you have to make an example of them. I think I need to make an example of people trying to enforce some compliance or demands without any contribution, a common problem in OSS.
- chhum 5y ago
  Women aren't a gender minority. > They are in tech.
normdeplume2 5y ago
Good to see a piece like this. It is well researched and considered. This comment thread, on the other hand, makes me want to nuke the entire tech community from space.

10 points by chhum 5y ago

> This lack of diversity is unacceptable. Open source contributors self-select. They have to put time in, usually for $0 and often without thanks. I don't know of any FOSS project who asks, or cares, about race or sex or anything else except code, or if the project is ill-maintained, at least your patch will get just as ignored regardless of your background. The article reads like some (white) Karen who wants to talk to FOSS' manager, there isn't any. If you think there should be more people sending patches or running FOSS projects, bring them, if their contributions are any good non-broken projects will be glad for them.

normdeplume2 5y ago
I'm not sure if you read the article, but literally every one of your points is clearly addressed Open source contributors self-select. > Yes, and if the environment is hostile to people of colour, or specific genders, they obviously won't contribute. They have to put time in, usually for $0 and often without thanks > Right. As the author states in a comment below the piece: "Open source work should be paid work, and, until it is, it shouldn't be a requirement to getting a job -- that only increases inequity when so much of the unpaid care work falls on those already minoritized by tech and open source." I don't know of any FOSS project who asks, or cares, about race or sex or anything else except code, or if the project is ill-maintained, at least your patch will get just as ignored regardless of your background. > So how do you explain all the research that tells you this isn't true? Such as this piece - https://peerj.com/preprints/1733/ https://peerj.com/preprints/1733/ - cited in the article.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  The data of the study doesn't reflect these conclusions to be honest. The most simple one, that women engage in far fewer numbers explains all observable effects in my opinion. Also the users the data observes are found on Github and Google+. This is a insufficient data if you write about the open source community in general. The implicit bias test the authors used to certify themselves have problems justifying their relevance.
  - chhum 5y ago
    "The most simple one, that women engage in far fewer numbers explains all observable effects in my opinion." > Well yes. But why do you think that is? If OSS is, in general, hostile to woman (and I would suggest that it is) than obviously fewer of them engage with it. Of course that same problem is reflected all the way up the chain - fewer woman become programmers because computing is hostile to them - a trend which starts at school and has been the case since about the 1980s.
- fivelessminutes 5y ago
  > I'm not sure if you read the article > As the author states in a comment Ie, not in the article. Can you elaborate on how that paper 'tells me' my own lived experience the last 20 years maintaining FOSS projects and offering patches 'isn't true'? That sounds arrogant on your part. The paper tries to guess gender from github nyms and profile pics, and looking for google + integration, this seems like a red flag to me. I couldn't guess gender or sex from that, especially considering regional differences, like anime pictures for profile pics, unless it was explicitly telling me in the name. What they may instead be partitioning is the aggressiveness / confidence of the nym and its presentation, which corrolates later to what happens at the first hurdle for their patches. For simple bug fixes, patches are typically acceptable right away. For more complex fixes and new features, some negotiation is needed with the maintainer as to how it should be done, there are often several ways that are reasonable, but eg, only one or two that align with future plans for the code. If the maintainer asks for a redo, a good proportion of contributors give up, they have exhausted their initial energy. Similarly, when asked for tests, or presented with considerations for other supported platforms the contributor doesn't care about, more give up. It requires extra confidence to approach the maintainer about preferred ways to do the patch before just starting on it. The maintainers are sometimes assholes (I am pretty sure, to everyone). I think it's very hard to unpick why patches didn't go anywhere unless you follow the story of each, certainly you need abnormal energy and confidence to get started and get over the hurdles for anything nontrivial.
eesmith 5y ago
> Open source contributors self-select. You are looking only at the last step into becoming a FOSS contributor. There are other selection filters you have missed, but which are touched on in the essay. The article mentions "the vast majority of open source contributors are either volunteers or work for sponsoring organizations." I believe that is correct. Those who work for sponsoring organizations aren't quite "self-selected", in that their employer is also involved, if only to grant copyright permission. I wouldn't say that all of the Google staff working on the open-source part of Chrome are self-selected open source contributors. Would you? And don't forget the article mentions a Fortune analysis that "the world’s biggest companies, who are the frequent sponsors of high-profile OSS projects, are still lagging behind in diverse hires." That's a selection filter right there. Even if all FOSS contributors are self-selected, there are clearly systemic biases in who is able to make a decision. Consider the mentioned "unpaid care work", which includes raising children and taking care of the elderly. Many societies regard this as a woman's responsibility, so even if two people have to decide to spend their volunteer time working on open source vs. doing unpaid care work, a man in those cultures may find it easier to "self-select" open source development than a woman might. > If you think there should be more people sending patches or running FOSS projects, bring them Someone working two jobs to support a family has little free time for open source development. Someone working part-time at a job and full-time child minding also has little free time. OTOH, someone with money can have a job with the evenings off, can pay for a babysitter, can order food instead of cooking, etc. As a result, poor people are underrepresented in open source software development if only because of the lack of available free time. Historic racism in the US contributes to the modern correlation between wealth and the social construct of "race". Blacks, for example, are more likely to be poor, and therefore less likely to be in a position to be able to "self-select" in the first place. Personally, I see Universal Basic Income as a way to get a lot of good open source developers, by increasing the number of people who are able to volunteer. > I don't know of any FOSS project who asks, or cares, about race or sex or anything else except code Have you missed the last 10 years of discussions about FOSS projects that have actively removed the use of "master/slave"? That sure sounds like FOSS projects which (at least claim to) care about race. Here too you are looking only the end point of the process - someone who contributes to a FOSS project. Those who have removed "master/slave" argue that such terms may inhibit people from becoming a FOSS contributor in the first place. Similarly, a FOSS project with a Discord project discussion channel where the developers regular post pictures of sexy women might disproportionately inhibit contributions from women. Even if they are completely wrong, my point is that there are many selection filters beyond "does a project accept or reject code based on the contributors race, sex, etc."

4chub 5y ago

Maybe we need an anonymous answer to Github ("4chub") such that all contributions are anonymous and vetted on merit only. No more Karen to complain that the people giving away their work for free are too this or not enough that.

lukaszwojtow 5y ago

WTF is this junk? You're free to bring contributions from 'women and other gender minorities' to any OSS.

coldtea 5y ago

>This lack of diversity is unacceptable. To whom? You can always start your own FOSS project and include more varied people/genders. You cannot dictate what others do on their own time/dime as a passion project/hobby. Did these people attempted to get into OSS and failed, were not welcomed, etc? That would be a criterion that makes sense. Else it's either a non-issue (they simply elect not to, for whatever cultural or other reasons) or an upstream issue (e.g. educational). People feeling not welcome in some FOSS project can always start their own project (and be as inclusive as they wish). If Lynne Jolitz could get into FOSS in 1992, others can do it in the much more sensitive and inclusive tech/general culture of 2021.

skitout 5y ago
>To whom? ... or why ? 1) Diversity of people, of experiences and point of views can boost a project (this includes "minorities", genders, countries of origin... but it is not limited to this). 2) Being able to attract more people to contribute can boost a project. So if you care about an OSS project or OSS in general, that makes sense to think about those issues. On a bigger picture, people working (often for free) on OSS are doing an amazing job that has a big impact in the world we are living. In a more societal point of view, it also make sense to 1) try to include the views and experience of many different people on project that will have an impact on everybody 2) find ways that more people and more diverse people contribute Everybody can contribute on an OSS. But there are things preventing some people to contribute and that we can ameliorate. There are ways to make more people and more diverse people to contribute or to contribute more.
- coldtea 5y ago
  >1) Diversity of people, of experiences and point of views can boost a project (this includes "minorities", genders, countries of origin... but it is not limited to this). 2) Being able to attract more people to contribute can boost a project. Maybe, but that's an abstract idea about society/culture, not some natural law that applies to everything. The maintainers of a project don't have to necessarily agree, or want to dillute their own perspectives. FOSS is often about personal (or small team) passion and/or a BDFL driving it, not about "design by commitee" (and the commitee being diverse can make things worse). Many FOSS projects want or could use less "points of view" and more singular vision and focus.

raxxorrax 5y ago

Since there are no barriers in open source, it has to be a self-inflicted problem. You can start just now. Pick a project or start your own. Not every developer contributes either. Aside from that anonymous open source contributions are plentiful, so maybe it isn't even true. I don't believe any barrier aside from the technical one exists here or even can exist because there is no authority that could keep anyone out. > women and other gender minorities Women aren't a gender minority. > Enforced codes of conduct matter I don't think so, you want OSS to cater to you. You sell yourself to companies that want to enforce compliance and you are the useful vehicle. This is why you get animosity, not because of your sex. > has found that women strongly consider open source codes of conduct before making their first contributions I dismiss this because there is no evidence at all. > Open source leadership You didn't even understand the concept. > Zainab Daodu says you have to make an example of them. I think I need to make an example of people trying to enforce some compliance or demands without any contribution, a common problem in OSS.

chhum 5y ago
Women aren't a gender minority. > They are in tech.

normdeplume2 5y ago

Good to see a piece like this. It is well researched and considered. This comment thread, on the other hand, makes me want to nuke the entire tech community from space.