Open source projects should run office hours • Hacker News Board

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#21

Post by gwbas1c » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 2:51 AM UTC

lolsal wrote: post #7

Anyone can run office hours for any of their open source projects they want - that sounds great! But I won't and I don't feel any sort of obligation to do so, so I don't think 'should' is really appropriate here.

At my previous job, I used to run "office hours" originally as a way to onboard new engineers. They later turned into discussions on technical topics when someone needed it.

It really depends on the nature of your project and knowing the limits of async communication. If you have lots of contributors, it might help.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#22

Post by HeyLaughingBoy » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 2:56 AM UTC

hodgesrm wrote: post #12

softwaredoug wrote: post #6

The very short consulting can be pretty intense. People come fast and furious and want answers. They sometimes are folks who really badly need a larger consulting or training engagement from a specialist, but can't afford it. So they sometimes come hard, sometimes frantically, looking for miracle fixes. I thought they could be fun, but you really had to be on your toes to do it well. And you need to set really clear…

My rule is anything you can do during the time it takes to eat lunch is free. If you need to bill something that small you need to rethink your business model.

You must eat a lot faster than I do :-)

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#23

Post by neartheplain » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 2:58 AM UTC

For me, the way to consult with open-source maintainers has always been through their projects’ Freenode IRC channels.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#24

Post by klingon79 » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:00 AM UTC

hardwaresofton wrote: post #17

vulcan01 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the 'should' is targeted at developers who want their projects to grow (which is not all open-source developers).

To riff on this I think this weird expectation of projects to "grow" is a side effect of the increasing corporate influence on F/OSS. So many conference talks' second slide is a "numbers" slide wit how many github stars, active contributors and other vanity metrics. It strikes me that the point is not just to convey that the project has an ecosystem behind it (with the implication there being that you can get free fe…

I was told that internally at Redhat if you’re assigned to a project and the project becomes unsupported by the company, you have a certain amount of time to be picked up by another team, after which, if you aren’t, you are let go.

I know that this is kinder than just firing someone outright if the project they were on failed, but the thought of it makes me feel uncomfortable.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#25

Post by phendrenad2 » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:04 AM UTC

This is a great idea. Also any free slots could be opened up to general questions, perhaps via a Twitch or YouTube stream, so that the more general questions can be recorded for posterity and documentation.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#26

Post by arch-ninja » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:05 AM UTC

sillysaurusx wrote: post #3

I've had massive success with this in ML. My twitter DMs have become almost-daily office hour sessions with people trying to solve hard ML problems. The last fellow was so happy he venmo'd me $250 after I merely asked for "pay whatever you thought that was worth." Apparently putting "DMs open" in your twitter bio is an excellent way to meet new people. Also, tweet (often!) about what you're working on. Post lots of q…

It's kind of neat observing the same economics that drive Instagram influencers also drive sharing logical thinking. I wonder if both sides of the human brain behave the same way? (organic v. ogic). Actually it's far more likely that social effects are the cause, and social effects benefit both organic runaway trains as well as logical runaway trains.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#27

Post by daveed » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:06 AM UTC

Hi! If you're thinking of giving office hours for your project... I've been working on a site (http://booktime.xyz/) that's meant for this. It's like a calendly where you can manage different meeting types more easily, they can be paid or unpaid, and we keep your contact private. Feel free to email me at (david@booktime.xyz) too. We've been polishing it up, and I'm happy to take feedback.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#28

Post by vinceguidry » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:10 AM UTC

kjjjjjjjjjjjjjj wrote: post #19

People who want office hours should pay open source projects to do so

Monetizing by upselling to longer consulting sessions is discussed in the article.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#29

Post by josephg » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:15 AM UTC

softwaredoug wrote: post #6

The very short consulting can be pretty intense. People come fast and furious and want answers. They sometimes are folks who really badly need a larger consulting or training engagement from a specialist, but can't afford it. So they sometimes come hard, sometimes frantically, looking for miracle fixes. I thought they could be fun, but you really had to be on your toes to do it well. And you need to set really clear…

I can imagine there’s a “right” amount of this sort of thing. Like, if you work on a project doesn’t have much traction, it can be nice to have the people using it meeting up and talking about it. It can keep energy and motivation high. And hearing what people are working on (with demos) is a blast.

On the flip side, if you work on a project that’s already popular, you don’t want to be spending all your time doing free Q&A. Especially not for enterprise folks who have money but aren’t paying anyway. This is how maintainer burnout happens.

There’s a sweet spot here, which will vary by project and by maintainer.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#30

Post by xahrepap » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:16 AM UTC

klingon79 wrote: post #24

hardwaresofton wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To riff on this I think this weird expectation of projects to "grow" is a side effect of the increasing corporate influence on F/OSS. So many conference talks' second slide is a "numbers" slide wit how many github stars, active contributors and other vanity metrics. It strikes me that the point is not just to convey that the project has an ecosystem behind it (with the implication there being that you can get free fe…

I was told that internally at Redhat if you’re assigned to a project and the project becomes unsupported by the company, you have a certain amount of time to be picked up by another team, after which, if you aren’t, you are let go. I know that this is kinder than just firing someone outright if the project they were on failed, but the thought of it makes me feel uncomfortable.

This is more or less also how IBM operates. I know someone who had to interview for other teams at IBM because their other IBM project ended. After a while of trying to navigate the politics of it all they just gave up on IBM completely.