3 ms·

- FWIW - While I have a handful of my own open source projects (mostly libraries), I gave up on trying to contribute to open source. I tried approaching a numb

- FWIW - While I have a handful of my own open source projects (mostly libraries), I gave up on trying to contribute to open source. I tried approaching a number of projects and the level of disinterest and arrogance was frankly jaw-dropping. I was treated like someone who is out to outsmart and put to shame everyone on the "core team". In one case I asked if they had any thoughts on moving from Google Code to GitHub, listing possible benefits and reasons. To this the first reply was that forking was evil, GitHub was broken and that I shouldn't really be troubling very busy people with such stupid questions. Then more people piled on with personal attacks. That was damn odd. All I wanted was to submit a bugfix. With another project I wrote them how to trim down and lighten the code, and no one even bothered to reply. I wasn't condescending, always bearing in mind that it was their project and I was just passing by. Yet another project - made a replacement for an awful app icon - again, like talking to a wall, not a blip from the other end. One notable exception was the Linux Kernel project. They accepted a couple of patches with no fuss whatsoever, and rejected another 2 or 3 with good arguments. (edit) Having thought about it a bit more - the problems appear to lie with multi-person projects. I had good experience submitting fixes and patches to single-maintainer projects. They were all accepted or rejected promptly and with courtesy. But once there's a group, then there are leaders, prima donnas, politics, social hierarchies and you name it. A coding society, not a development project.

IsaacSchlueter 15y ago
This is very interesting. The problem, of course, is that a single person can't get as much done as a team. At a certain point, many projects need to have more developers involved. What do you think it was that made the Linux Kernel different? I assume there are leaders and social whatevers going on there.
- bryanlarsen 15y ago
  In general terms, the key difference between a 'nice' group and a 'mean' group is the degree to whether the hierarchy in the group is obviously correct. In the linux kernel, there is a clear hierarchy that is pretty close to being obviously correct. Linux obviously deserves to be the leader, and position/status is very clearly linked to a persons contributions to the greater good of the project. On single person projects, the hierarchy is also trivially clear, obvious, correct and unassailable. Many group projects fail the "clear hierarchy" test, often because they try to eliminate the hierarchy for some sort of ideals. But humans being human there is always some sort of hierarchy, so establishment of the hierarchy is informal and ongoing. Of course, "informal and ongoing" is a lot better than 'wrong' which is the case with many clear hierarchies. This is why the idealism vis a vis trying to prevent hierarchies exists in the first place. The obvious correctness of the hierarchy is one huge advantage small companies have over large companies and non-profits.
- huhtenberg 15y ago
  I'd say that the LK project has - (a) A formalized well-functioning hierarchy. There are people responsible for each part of the project - networking, vm, file systems, etc. (b) Highly skilled C developers. The language appear to have a big influence on how one carries himself in the community. C++ devs tend to be opinionated know-it-alls, Java devs - the same way but friendlier if a bit more condescending, etc. The C crowd is the humbliest by far and this makes the most pleasant to be in, so from this follows... (c) An established culture of mutual respect between the peers. If someone says something dumb, there's always a chance that it is not and you are simply not getting it. As with any community it could've gone in any direction, but in the end it all comes down to the leader. Linus is a witty opinionated, but inherently friendly and polite person, and so is the community in general.
maytsch 15y ago
To be fair, it might not be the best idea to come in with high-level ideas such as moving to another development platform or changing the code style. That kind of topic is just bound to have some high-profile opposition within the developer community and become political very fast.
- huhtenberg 15y ago
  I wasn't suggesting they'd move. I asked if they considered moving.

IsaacSchlueter 15y ago

This is very interesting. The problem, of course, is that a single person can't get as much done as a team. At a certain point, many projects need to have more developers involved. What do you think it was that made the Linux Kernel different? I assume there are leaders and social whatevers going on there.

bryanlarsen 15y ago
In general terms, the key difference between a 'nice' group and a 'mean' group is the degree to whether the hierarchy in the group is obviously correct. In the linux kernel, there is a clear hierarchy that is pretty close to being obviously correct. Linux obviously deserves to be the leader, and position/status is very clearly linked to a persons contributions to the greater good of the project. On single person projects, the hierarchy is also trivially clear, obvious, correct and unassailable. Many group projects fail the "clear hierarchy" test, often because they try to eliminate the hierarchy for some sort of ideals. But humans being human there is always some sort of hierarchy, so establishment of the hierarchy is informal and ongoing. Of course, "informal and ongoing" is a lot better than 'wrong' which is the case with many clear hierarchies. This is why the idealism vis a vis trying to prevent hierarchies exists in the first place. The obvious correctness of the hierarchy is one huge advantage small companies have over large companies and non-profits.
huhtenberg 15y ago
I'd say that the LK project has - (a) A formalized well-functioning hierarchy. There are people responsible for each part of the project - networking, vm, file systems, etc. (b) Highly skilled C developers. The language appear to have a big influence on how one carries himself in the community. C++ devs tend to be opinionated know-it-alls, Java devs - the same way but friendlier if a bit more condescending, etc. The C crowd is the humbliest by far and this makes the most pleasant to be in, so from this follows... (c) An established culture of mutual respect between the peers. If someone says something dumb, there's always a chance that it is not and you are simply not getting it. As with any community it could've gone in any direction, but in the end it all comes down to the leader. Linus is a witty opinionated, but inherently friendly and polite person, and so is the community in general.

maytsch 15y ago

To be fair, it might not be the best idea to come in with high-level ideas such as moving to another development platform or changing the code style. That kind of topic is just bound to have some high-profile opposition within the developer community and become political very fast.

huhtenberg 15y ago
I wasn't suggesting they'd move. I asked if they considered moving.