Updates from February, 2014 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • stefano 11:32 am on February 28, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: firenze, ge, nuovo pignone   

    Old and new, big Italian engineering 

    Steam turbine being delivered from Firenze

    Steam turbine being delivered from Firenze

    My brother sent me this image of a steam turbine shipped from GE plant in Firenze (aka Nuovo Pignone) to a customer. It’s so cool to see massive, modern, mechanic equipment being shipped around the world with Brunelleschi’s masterpiece of Italian engineering in the background.

  • stefano 10:30 am on February 26, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , fork, libreoffice,   

    Sustainability of Open Source software communities beyond a fork: How and why has the LibreOffice project evolved?

    via Sustainability of Open Source software communities beyond a fork: How and why has the LibreOffice project evolved?.

  • stefano 2:29 pm on February 5, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , gender, , , , profile, sex   

    Tracking gender diversity in the OpenStack developer community 

    The OpenStack Foundation has always tried to increase genders diversity in our community: we joined the Outreach Program for Women, established clear policies for our summits and in general we’ve been actively promoting good behavior across the board. A few weeks ago I realized that we were lacking of a decent way to track our progress in gender diversity in the OpenStack developer community and decided to improve the situation.

    When Anne asked me for the number of women or non-male developers in OpenStack, I realized that we don’t have that number. When people register to become OpenStack developers they need to become members of OpenStack Foundation and have an account on Launchpad. Neither of them track gender information. The best number I had to offer was the t-shirt kind requested at our Summits. If you don’t measure it you can’t improve it, the saying goes. So we thought we need to offer the option for Foundation’s members to tell us their gender, if they want to. How do we ask for gender without being disrepectful to non-binary genders?

    We did some research, discussed them on the bug and adapted the best practices to our case. We wanted to keep the choice short and not to offend anybody by leaving out options. An open entry form leads to hard to use data (people have very creative ways to spell just about anything), using pronouns would have made translations a nightmare. We need a way to restrict options so we can easily count them in the database so the binary options male/female were set first and ‘Prefer not to say’ was soon added as another option, since it’s really not mandatory to disclose that information. For non-binary genders using “Non-binary” sounded too geeky to me; using ‘other’ sounds weird, borderline offensive. We came to a consensus on my suggestion to have an open entry prefixed by “Let me tell you”. I liked this phrase because I feel like “Let me tell you” empowers the member to own their own gender definition. The new form is now live so you can now register or edit your OpenStack Member profile and add your gender (if you want to).

  • stefano 1:02 pm on January 20, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ,   

    Why people contribute to OpenStack 

    A few days ago, I asked 55 OpenStack developers why they decided to submit one patch to OpenStack and what prevented them from contributing more. The sample polled people who contributed only once in the past 12 months, looking for anecdotal evidence for what we can do to improve the life of the occasional contributor. To me, occasional contributors are as important as the core contributors to sustain the growth of OpenStack in the medium/long term. Since it’s possible that the community has already already hired the best candidates among Python developers and system operators, to sustain the growth of OpenStack we need to tap into the wider Python community and experts of large distributed systems coming from other languages (Java, for starters). Knowing what hurdles new contributors face when they first join OpenStack is a first step to make onboarding easier and multiple contributions more frequent.

    People who replied are for the most parts users of OpenStack, that is developers and dev-ops people working on deployments of OpenStack for internal usage and system integrators who develop and deploy OpenStack for their customers. A third group of occasional contributors are developers of projects that use or are used by OpenStack, like Docker or Ceph.

    The top reasons to submit a patch went from the practical convenience of having patches maintained upstream, to fixing bugs (discovered during a proof of concept or in more advanced phases of a deployment) or to add/fix funcionalities to better integrate OpenStack with other projects. Finally, people contribute patches for personal growth and to enrich resumes.

    Why don’t they submit more? There are three main stumbling blocks. Legal hurdles delayed contributions, and even prevented (at least) one. The reasons for the delays range from NDAs with customers to incompatibility with corporate policies to release software under open source license and sign a Corporate Contributor License Agreement. Another group of reasons for the delay is the long time it takes for contributions to travel the review queue. The time it takes for patches to get in OpenStack repositories was mentioned more than once. Finally, the lack of simple issues to fix in the spare time: apparently the community fixes simple bugs too rapidly.

    The results cannot be considered representative but they seem to confirm that legal hurdles and speed of the reviews are preventing more casual contributions. While there are already many discussions on how to improve reviewing times, changing the way we handle contributions legally requires a massive endeavour to change OpenStack Foundation’s bylaws. The fact that simple issues to fix are hard to find is new to me: it may indicate that there are lots of people joining the community fixing these ‘low hanging fruits’ or something else. I think more analysis is needed in this area.

    • everett_toews 11:39 am on January 23, 2014 Permalink | Reply

      What? Nobody fessed up and admitted it was to get a free pass to the Summit?

      • stefano 4:24 pm on January 23, 2014 Permalink | Reply

        Surprising :) But no, I confirm, nobody mentioned that :)

    • tadowguy 6:32 pm on January 24, 2014 Permalink | Reply

      One of the reasons Ubuntu Harvest (http://harvest.ubuntu.com/) was created was to highlight easy opportunities for people to work on in Ubuntu. While it never reached it’s full potential, I think the theory is good. Perhaps a tool like it would help?

      • stefano 6:39 pm on January 24, 2014 Permalink | Reply

        I didn’t know about Harvest, thanks for bringing it up. One comment I heard is that the ‘low hanging fruit’ bugs are solved too rapidly for casual contributors to find/fix them or there are not enough bugs tagged properly.

    • twitter_tadowguy 6:41 pm on January 24, 2014 Permalink | Reply

      @Stefano, sorry I failed to include this before, took me a few minutes to find it, but look at this time to fix chart, it’s basically approaching zero.


      Last week I had a bug that I’d been working on (and was assigned to me) “taken” when someone submitted code that marked it as fixing it. I worked with the developer who ended up fixing it, but it was frustrating.

  • stefano 10:05 am on January 13, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , recruiting   

    Exploring why people contribute to OpenStack 

    No doubt that OpenStack is one of the largest open source development efforts existing at the moment, with Linux, Debian and few others.  What can be improved to make the OpenStack community grow faster? How can we help new contributors become productive more rapidly?

    Whatever dimension you look at, the growth of the OpenStack developers community is astonishing. I’ve looked at the reasons for this growth and I’ve identified four main causes summarized in my presentation at Linux Conf North America and Open World Forum in Paris last year:

    • One clear mission to solve a hard problem
    • One initial core team with strong motivation to solve that problem
    • One team dedicated to recruiting new team members
    • One clear path to onboard new members in the team

    The first two points are pretty clear already and don’t seem to need much tweaking: those ain’t broken, so no need to fix’em. The other two are not broken either but they’re the kind of stuff you want to stay on top of because once you notice they’re broken, the cost to fix them will be higher. Recently I started to ask myself what margins of improvements there are in recruiting and onboarding new members in our communities.

    I quickly realized that while we know a lot about the top contributors to OpenStack, we don’t know much about the ‘long tail’ of contributors. It’s fairly easy to understand why the people responsible for 80% of OpenStack code and documentation work on the project. But who are the occasional contributors and what are their motivations to join the community? I embarked on a quest to get to know this long tail in an effort to understand how we can improve recruiting and onboarding new developers.

    After a conversation with Asheesh Laroia, of OpenHatch fame, I selected 55 random developers from the list of those who submitted a single change to the integrated OpenStack programs during the past 12 months. These people went through quite a huge chunk of trouble only to submit one single patch: besides learning enough of the quite complex OpenStack code, they had to sign the Individual CLA (maybe the Corporate CLA, too), learn about git review and the other tools, go through the code review process. I would expect that whoever goes through that process, does it with the intention to stick around. So I asked the sample two simple questions:

    • What made you decide to submit a patch to OpenStack?
    • What prevented you to submit more patches?

    I’ll wait a few days for their answers and share more details. Feel free to answer the questions leaving a comment here, too.

    • Kevin Fox 9:14 am on January 14, 2014 Permalink | Reply

      I’ve been trying to contribute since October. Ran into major issues with the contributor agreement. Mailing list posting here:

      Motivations for contribution back include:

      Giving back patches to the community as a small payment for receiving so much.
      Getting recognition for the patches we are using internally in our lab.
      Upstreaming of our patches so we do not have to port them on every updated release.

      I have not contributed yet, or was prevented from writing a few other patches due to the CLA really not fitting our situation. Our organization has, after years of effort, figured out how to release software open source. The org has not ever ran into a project that needed a CLA though, and it may take several more years for it to come to grips with them. The OpenStack project itself does not have a CLA that fits the situation either. The legal team is reviewing the issue and is working on it, but it is very slow going.

      IMO, the CLA has been a very high hurtle that projects like the Linux Kernel have very successfully gotten away without.

      • stefano 9:48 am on January 14, 2014 Permalink | Reply

        Thank you Kevin. Your case is indeed a painful one, I apologize for it. I wish the next Board of Directors at the end of January will evaluate a solution.

  • stefano 9:24 am on December 11, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: activity, bitergia, grimoire, , stackalytics, wikidsmart   

    How not to use OpenStack Community Metrics tools 

    I have noticed this morning another article/blog post mistakenly trying to extrapolate hard facts about a company’s involvement in OpenStack using one of the reporting tools built for the community. The reporter went to Stackalytics (but it could have gone to Activity Board, it would have been the same) to check if Oracle had made any contribution to the OpenStack codebase. That’s the wrong way to use these tools: numbers regarding companies contributing to OpenStack published daily cannot be trusted.

    Both Stackalytics and Activity Board depend on data that is entered voluntarily by the contributors to OpenStack, therefore they cannot be trusted. Stackalytics has a mapping file in its repository that is kept up to date by developers themselves (those that know its existence). Activity Board pulls data straight from the OpenStack Foundation Members database: when you sign up as Member of the Foundation (a precondition to become a developer) you’re asked to enter data about who pays for your contribution. The bylaws of the Foundation also require that you keep that info up to date, but we know as a fact that few people log back in their member profile and even fewer update their affiliation. Therefore we know that the data about the affiliation in all reporting tools is not 100% reliable at any point in time. It’s good enough if you’re looking at the top contributing companies where the volumes are high enough to remain fairly valid despite small percentage errors. But when a reporter goes to check if a total newcomer to the community has submitted any code, that number is very likely to be wrong (and close to zero): the new developers may have not understood what the Affiliation field is and not filled it out (I see a lot of those on a weekly basis) and they’re very unlikely to know about the mapping file in git for Stackalytics.

    The data that I trust most (but still not 100%, especially for ‘long tail’ contributors) are the reports published with Bitergia at release time: every OpenStack release we do a lot of manual cleanup of the data in the Foundation database, ask people to update their affiliation, normalize names of companies and circulate the report for comments before making them public. Still, those may contain errors which we track on Launchpad.

    As far as I know the reporter didn’t ask the Foundation nor Oracle if anybody could point at actual commits done by Oracle employees and that’s what he should have done.

    OpenStack prouds itself for being an open community and I’ve been the first proposer of having a public way to see the various activities inside the project, in real time and including the information about companies, not just individuals. I think we need to discuss how we can provide better data and avoid giving false illusion of precision to casual visitors to these sites.

    • Ryan Lane 7:19 am on December 12, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      I think this is a reasonable use of the tools. If a company doesn’t have their affiliation information up to date then they need to get that fixed. The company can then post information showing that they are indeed contributing.

      The onus of properly updated metrics for an organization needs to be on the organization and not on the person using the metrics. Untrustable metrics aren’t useful metrics.

      Maybe there’s something we can do to make the process less error prone for people contributing to get their affiliations correct?

      • stefano 10:11 am on December 12, 2013 Permalink | Reply

        I think the main problem with delegating responsibilities to companies is that they have very few tools to fix the issue themselves. Neither I think it’s fair to ask newcomers to do yet another thing (set the mapping file in stackalytics or something else) before they can commit code or file a bug: it’s already too hard to start interacting with OpenStack. I think we need to find a better way.

        One line of thoughts I have is to create the concept of ‘group’ and ‘sub-groups’ in our members database and tie such concept to the Corporate Contributor License Agreement. I think it deserves a blog post on its own. The basic idea is that the person who manages a development team at, say, IBM, instead of signing the Corporate CLA on Echosign and provide the list of authorized committers on the same platform, creates a group on the ID.openstack.org service and assigns to that group the individual members of his/her development team. This will also simplify the management of the Corporate CLA. It won’t solve 100% of the issues of people/companies who participate in other activities that is not managed via gerrit though.

    • Herman Narkaytis 9:15 am on December 21, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      Just a couple of notes on Stackalytics affiliation rules.
      1. Here is a description of algorithm https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Stackalytics#Company_affiliation
      It is not only about manually mantained mapping file. Mapping file is maintained directly by contributors. The main source of affilation data is emails from commits info. If commit is signed with hnarkaytis@mirantis.com, then affilation is evident.
      2. There are 701 conributors profiles for Icehouse at the moment. 97 (13.8%) are classified as *independent. The rest 600+ contributors are affilated according email’ domains or mapping file. *independent contributors made only 7% of all commits. There is a regular mail compain for *independent contributors, that ensure that all of them are aware about their affilation. Top 10 *independent (50%+ of commits) contributors confirmed their affiliation via email. This means that maximum error of measurment is about 3%.

      As core contributor of Stackalytics I can confirm that affilations are not 100% correct. Confidence interval for all measurments is 3%.
      Issue that you raised is valid and we gonna put an official disclamer on landing page.

      • stefano 5:47 pm on December 23, 2013 Permalink | Reply

        You’re right, Herman, I forgot to mention that there are heuristics that help ‘guessing’ the highest percentage of commit attributions.

  • stefano 3:57 pm on October 31, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , h264, mpegla, , , webrtc   

    Cisco, Mozilla, and H.264 

    Let’s state the obvious with respect to VP8 vs H.264: We lost, and we’re admitting defeat. Cisco is providing a path for orderly retreat that leaves supporters of an open web in a strong enough position to face the next battle, so we’re taking it.

    via Monty Montgomery.

  • stefano 9:51 am on October 24, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , upgrade,   

    Ubuntu is not going to give me a decent desktop OS anymore 

    I’ve always been an Ubuntu fan for the past 10 years since the distribution came out with the promise of a usable deskto, with a promise of openness, regular releases, great integration between different and separated projects, great vision for world dominance. I loved all of that and I loved the execution, including the latest evolution. I love HUD and how it uses screen real estate, allows me to be more effective at commanding window-based application without having to touch the mouse. I love most of Unity, the dash and the lenses although I don’t use most of it.

    Lately I’ve gone from concerned fan to very sad: I’m considering switching to another distribution. What I don’t really like is the lack of investments from Canonical on productivity tools that we live for: an email client and a calendar client. I already ranted about the sad state of free software collaboration tools and unfortunately Canonical decided to invest time and energy in supporting not a desktop for productivity but as a gaming platform, a cloud operating system and a mobile system. Canonical is devoting its engineers to develop things I really don’t care about. All I wanted was a good, solid desktop operating system for my daily computing needs: email, calendar, web browsing, audio/video collaboration tools and a decent way to exchange ‘office’ documents with peopls stuck in 1998 way of producing content. Sadly Ubuntu is not going to provide that in the near future, it even backed out from offering the most basic tools like an email client and a calendar client.

    When I look at the alternatives though, I am even more sad and want to cry. GNOME seems to be stupidly following all the things that Apple does, including the obvious mistakes like the broken behavior of ALT-TAB (I expect GNOME developers to invert the way we scroll pages any time now, because Apple did that with absolutely no logical reason). GNOME also lacks a modern email client, addressbook and calendar client, with Evolution being stuck in 1998. And spare me to mention KDE: great technology, just no decent UI for it.

    I’m sure Ubuntu will look great in a couple of years on TVs, phones, clouds but all I wanted was my desktop and I fear that for the next couple of years I’ll be stuck with a broken one, being it Ubuntu or Fedora or something else.

    • Vole 3:09 am on October 28, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      “productivity tools that we live for: an email client and a calendar client”

      This is simply not true. You are assuming everyone shares your likes and dislikes. I much prefer webmail (which I regularly access from 3 different computers). I have no use for a desktop email client.

      • Stef 7:34 am on October 28, 2013 Permalink | Reply

        I have yet to find a web based email client that is fast and integrated in my workflow and doesn’t spy on me and he people I correspond with

    • LinuxCanuck 5:50 am on October 28, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      Why not use KDE applications in Unity if you like the UI of Unity, but not the apps?

      I really cannot see what you want coming from anybody. Email is all but dead. Mozilla’s Thunderbird gets little attention from its parent, so Evolution is not the only unloved child.

      People collaborate differently now. Smartphones and tablets have taken over. People can collaborate face to face and in real time as opposed to posting a message and waiting. There is a social cost, loss of freedom and privacy, but people seem okay with being on call 24/7. (I am not in that camp, BTW)

      The desktop computer is still around as are email clients and collaboration software, but they are a dying breed. So do not hold your breath hoping someone to back your idea. They are going where the trend is and I do not blame them.

      There are some distributions that are stuck in the past, but their stock is falling. They have won over some diehards who won’t change, but are getting left behind. But do not count on them to help you either. They are happy with 1998-ish Evolution.

      I do not use Ubuntu. I prefer KDE so am using Kubuntu. I like the UI. It can be tailored to work the way that I do. I love the applications. Dolphin is 100 times better than Nautilus as is K3b over Brasero. I could go on, but will spare you.

      I agree that GNOME is making a mistake, but not in the way that you do. I think that they are not going far enough.

      • Stef 8:20 am on October 28, 2013 Permalink | Reply

        I have never appreciated KDE and its applications but it’s a matter of taste, there is little to debate. I’ll give them a second look although the fact that you mention K3b makes me think you and I have totally different needs (I haven’t burned a disk in 8 years). You say email is not dead but then you confirm my thesis that Evolution and Thunderbird are dead in the water (or at least they’re not moving). That leaves us only with Kontact…
        You mention the loss of privacy and control and that’s one of the reasons for my rant: I think that for the free software/open source movement to give up on developing tools for personal productivity is a horrible mistake for the long term vision.

    • Jesus Israel Perales Martinez 1:29 pm on October 28, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      thunderbird is good and gnome-shell or unity shell have a integration for the cloud with gmail and hotmail calendars, this a simply excuse for change your distro but this a good idea, try elementary os or crunchbang , any distro with xfce ? , i am very happy with ubuntu 13.10(fb,twitter,youtube), fedora 19(work) and debian 7(server)

      • Stef 1:37 pm on October 28, 2013 Permalink | Reply

        @Jesus: I couldn’t care less of integrations with Gmail and Hotmail. In fact, if I cared about those I wouldn’t be talking about the lack of decent open source tools for personal information management. The web solutions are good enough for many people but they come at a too high price for me: lock in and privacy. Not good, and I don’t talk about my privacy only, but that of the people I correspond with and meet: I think it’s not fair to hand their data to Google or Microsoft without them authorizing me. Thunderbird is functioning, I use it as my main client but it has lots of areas that could be improved. My rant comes from the realization that it will not be improved by Mozilla, nor by anybody else; if things go well it will keep being maintained and bugs fixed. Not exactly something to be excited for. Meanwhile Google will keep moving gmail forward and us freedom-privacy-appreciating citizens will be stuck with software developed in the 90s. Too bad.

    • israel 6:58 pm on October 28, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      Basically irregardless of the distro you will generally get the same access to the same tools. So, switching to a different base distro wont help, as Ubuntu has access to most software that is available. If it isn’t in the repos, you can simply install a deb, or add a ppa.

      I also like Thunderbird, but understand that you may have the need for a more robust e-mail client.

      Of course they are working on both a calendar and e-mail client currently. They are built for Unity 8, though and probably wont be available until 14.04 (though you can install unity8 in 13.10, and the ubuntu touch apps, as well)
      They are not ignoring the desktop at all, or those needs. They are building scalable multi-device apps, and working on integrating unity8 with the desktop. So all work done for the phone will benefit the desktop. They use the same backends as the desktop uses. So any improvement to the backend (libraries, etc…) will most definitely benefit the desktop as well!

      Hang in there and try some of the other mail clients, there may be some Java based, cross platform ones that may do what you need for now. Or of course Wine/or VM if you really need a certain program.

      • Stef 10:09 am on October 29, 2013 Permalink | Reply

        Indeed, it’s a generalized problem. The reason why I pick on Ubuntu and Canonical is because they are the only ones that pushed the frontier of a GNU/Linux desktop. Since Canonical decided to spread its effort over to mobile I feel left behind. I wish them well and I wish that the development efforts of Unity8 and all the new apps will bring new life to the desktops too. I’m afraid it will take at least another couple of years before the new code will be up to speed with the existing code. That’s why I’m concerned: waiting two years to get apps that are up to the ones I have now… unfortunately I guess you’re right and there is little to do than to wait and see what happens.
        PS I don’t use Wine or any other OS. If I wanted to, I could just buy the original stuff, OS X or Windows, and give up on my freedom-powered desktop.

    • Looping 9:45 am on October 30, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      “What I don’t really like is the lack of investments from Canonical on productivity tools that we live for: an email client and a calendar client.”
      Maybe it’s because they are aware that popularity of desktop email is decreasing and web and mobile mail market share is increasing.

      • Stef 10:04 am on October 30, 2013 Permalink | Reply

        That’s one way to look at it. Another plausible explanation is that given the sad status of desktop email clients, people go and use web mail :) In any case, open source and free software have never been about popularity but freedom.

  • stefano 1:53 pm on July 28, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: elderly, , webnapperon   

    Webnapperon: a way to share URLs with my dad 

    Here is an interesting concept: RFID tags used by elderly to retrieve content stored online in different applications. I can see my dad using the  appropriate physical object to retrieve the pictures of his nephews or to read the local newspaper online or to see the meteo or to popup G+ feed (well… not G+ as Google fills it with junk, like trending things and suggestions… but you get the idea). I see a viable and sustainable business for this too, think of RFID tags attached to holiday greeting cards…

    ERASME – Webnapperon.

  • stefano 10:37 am on July 17, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , linus, , ,   

    What Linus can do inside Linux community and you can't do in yours 

    Linux kernel community has long been considered the greatest of all the open source communities. Linus Torvalds and his team has set the ground for open source development, defined processes and tools adopted and shared by other successful projects. The Linux kernel mailing list with its public review of patches and git, the tool to manage the incredible flow of code among thousands of people in tens of different branches laid the ground for many other open source projects. Even OpenStack doesn’t get close to those number (although OpenStack is only a three years old toddler and the kernel is old enough to vote and drink.) Linus has built an incredible community and an impressive culture around it. A culture where technology rules everything and also profanity and insults are common. And the results are clear: it worked for Linux kernel.

    This doesn’t mean that any community can live and prosper like the Linux kernel with the same culture of harsh criticisms, middle fingers or what Linus calls management by perkele. In fact, I think nobody else can afford managing open source communities the way Linus does. Torvalds can get away saying things like “trying to come up with some ‘code of conduct’ that says that people should be ‘respectful’ and ‘polite’ is just so much crap and bullshit”. I certainly can’t and chances are you can’t either.

    Now if you ask me if Torvalds should change his attitude my answer is: no, he is what he is and he’s made what he’s made because (or despite, who cares: results matter) of what he is. Should his lieutenants be assholes too? Of course not, and that’s why the kernel is still one of the most successful open source projects out there.

    via Linus Torvalds defends his right to shame Linux kernel developers | Ars Technica.

    • ladquin 11:18 am on July 17, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      I do think he should, but I also think he’ll never be able to. Not just because he feels completely right and entitled, but also because the success and achievements of the whole community have somehow created a sense of justification for such behaviour: “Hey, this guy is quite offensive…”, “But he created the linux kernel and changed the world! Who cares if he calls you an idiot??”.
      Again, I don’t expect him to change in any way, and I don’t know what the rest of the LK community will do about that, but now that I got some further insights into the communication “style”, will I ever consider joining such a group as a contributor? No.

      • Stef 11:25 am on July 17, 2013 Permalink | Reply

        Laura, I see your point and I agree with you. I probably wouldn’t join such community either. My point is that this harsh culture hasn’t prevented thousands of people to join the Linux kernel development and, more importantly, stick with it. If you wouldn’t join such community somebody else will. Communities don’t need to be for ‘everybody’, they just need to be for enough people to achieve their goals. I will argue for a change in the culture of Linux kernel when the current one starts to become clearly an obstacle to developing the kernel. In other words, until it’s not visibly broken, don’t fix it.

compose new post
next post/next comment
previous post/previous comment
show/hide comments
go to top
go to login
show/hide help
shift + esc