Am I doing Open Source wrong?
1 comments
I've been a project maintainer for GNU for years. Most of the people who wrote to me expressing interest in helping never actually did anything.
But on the other hand, quite a few people just submitted helpful patches out of the blue and then disappeared, never to be heard from again.
But on the other hand, quite a few people just submitted helpful patches out of the blue and then disappeared, never to be heard from again.
I have a small, niche Open Source project. Unnamed to protect the guilty :) It doesn't have a lot of followers but there is international interest.
My dilemma is I have received requests to become a "member" and "help out" since the beginning. But when I email back, saying "great! here are some bugs or areas you might help out with!", 99% of the time I get no further response. <p>For Open Source, my understanding has always been to work on a project, you must:
1. Dig in yourself, 2. Find something to fix or create, 3. Create a patch or set of files, 4. Submit it to the project moderators for approval, 5. Be invited to "join" based on your success in steps 1-4.
Have the "rules" changed? I explain to the requestors that I won't give "member" access right away: they have to write some code or make some other contribution, submit it for approval, and I'll consider letting them join. After that ... nothing.
Can I fix this? Am I doing this wrong? Is this exactly what I can expect?
I see other Open Source projects explicitly spell out the above join process. Do other projects have a better application/contribution ratio?
Related question: I've seen here on Hacker News that employers suggest candidates include pointers to Open Source projects they've done. Do employers actually _look_ at whether the candidate has actually _done_ anything?
I look at the profile of the people who contact me and most of the time they've done nothing even if they are a member of an Open Source project.