3 ms·

> It seems like they’re only interested in OSS when a) they get credit, and b) for only fixing problems that affect them. Even if that's the case, aren't those

> It seems like they’re only interested in OSS when a) they get credit, and b) for only fixing problems that affect them. Even if that's the case, aren't those supposed to be "ok" motivations? A lot of the point of giving people credit is to encourage further contributions. And people only fixing problems that affect them is a very common starting point for people becoming contributors.

cutemonster 3y ago
Definitely OK motivations. From what I've read, the majority of kernel contributors get paid by their employers, that is, they fix things that affect them. And, I'm guessing that getting credited for their work is important to them too, for career reasons if nothing else.
shortcake27 3y ago
My point (which I didn’t convey properly) is that the combination of the two isn’t all that productive, ie “I’ll only work on problems that affect me and only if you give me credit”. I get that true altruism probably doesn’t exist, but I’ve contributed to dozens of projects where I haven’t received credit, and I didn’t care because I helped fix problems that affected thousands of people, which I felt was more important than whatever label was placed on me (or not).
- alexsmarsh 3y ago
  [flagged]
- justinclift 3y ago
  > I’ve contributed to dozens of projects where I haven’t received credit, and I didn’t care because ... This seems a bit weird to me. Not the contribution-without-credit thing on your part, but the trying to denigrate the article authors contribution because their motivations were different from yours. Even though their motivations were just as valid as yours. :)
- emerongi 3y ago
  It seems it was quite productive, no? An important bug was fixed. Next time, it probably won't. Which may very well be a fine trade-off if giving credit is a lot of work that nobody wants to do - just expect less contributions with that approach.
- sangnoir 3y ago
  > I get that true altruism probably doesn’t exist It does exist, but unfortunately people who practice it are not believed by those who do not, because they cannot fathom it.
nocontextpls 3y ago
[dead]

cutemonster 3y ago

Definitely OK motivations. From what I've read, the majority of kernel contributors get paid by their employers, that is, they fix things that affect them. And, I'm guessing that getting credited for their work is important to them too, for career reasons if nothing else.

shortcake27 3y ago

My point (which I didn’t convey properly) is that the combination of the two isn’t all that productive, ie “I’ll only work on problems that affect me and only if you give me credit”. I get that true altruism probably doesn’t exist, but I’ve contributed to dozens of projects where I haven’t received credit, and I didn’t care because I helped fix problems that affected thousands of people, which I felt was more important than whatever label was placed on me (or not).

alexsmarsh 3y ago
[flagged]
justinclift 3y ago
> I’ve contributed to dozens of projects where I haven’t received credit, and I didn’t care because ... This seems a bit weird to me. Not the contribution-without-credit thing on your part, but the trying to denigrate the article authors contribution because their motivations were different from yours. Even though their motivations were just as valid as yours. :)
emerongi 3y ago
It seems it was quite productive, no? An important bug was fixed. Next time, it probably won't. Which may very well be a fine trade-off if giving credit is a lot of work that nobody wants to do - just expect less contributions with that approach.
sangnoir 3y ago
> I get that true altruism probably doesn’t exist It does exist, but unfortunately people who practice it are not believed by those who do not, because they cannot fathom it.

nocontextpls 3y ago

[dead]