Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Open source projects should run office hours

simonwillison.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 279 posts

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#91

Post by coliveira »

matkoniecz wrote: post #90

I have deep aversion to "Open source projects should run office hours" title. Maybe "Office hours may be a good idea for open source projects"? This would not suggest obligation. In general, fact that someone created or maintains or supports open source projects should not be considered to create any obligations beyond lack of malice and abuse. I am not obligated to support any bugs, create any features and it is per…

You're completely right. However, I notice a change in behavior in developers during the last decade. They view open source as an extension of their duties as software developers, i.e., something that they have to do. Following this point of view, they consider that working on a project brings commitments as if they were in a paid job, and started projecting this belief on others. I think this is very disturbing.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#92

Post by detaro »

fxtentacle wrote: post #89

Many projects that I use already have IRC with permanent log, so you can just go in there and estimate the times when the regulars hang out from the logs. And then you join at that time, too. It kind of is like office hours via chat.

I think having the explicit concept still has some value: a) "you can just go and ask" is a surprisingly large cultural barrier for many people (as are other conventions around developer channels), b) an explicitly set time will have higher success rate than guessing based on logs and c) it's also something the devs can structure and plan around. I.e. sure, I'll answer questions when I see them and have time, but steering people to ask when convenient to me also improves my experience maybe?

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#93

Post by klingon79 »

hardwaresofton wrote: post #49
klingon79 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sorry maybe I don't have my moral sensors tuned properly today but would you mind explaining what makes you feel uncomfortable about it? Is it more because RedHat carries itself like a consultancy than other large enterprise businesses? Is it that the possibility of being let go after a large project that you performed a relatively specialized role on feels just about right for a consultancy, but not for a business t…

> Is it that the possibility of being let go after a large project that you performed a relatively specialized role on feels just about right for a consultancy, but not for a business that carries themselves like a long term player?

This. Someone there could hire me onto a project that fails for some reason out of my control, and then, because I’m older, I wouldn’t get picked up by another team.

I don’t know if project-pickup retention is still how they operate; it’s several-year-old anecdotal information from a past worker there before they were acquired by IBM.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#94

Post by watwut »

matkoniecz wrote: post #90

I have deep aversion to "Open source projects should run office hours" title. Maybe "Office hours may be a good idea for open source projects"? This would not suggest obligation. In general, fact that someone created or maintains or supports open source projects should not be considered to create any obligations beyond lack of malice and abuse. I am not obligated to support any bugs, create any features and it is per…

I agree with you, but the article is not about that.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#95

Post by detaro »

thunderbong wrote: post #35

I think a lot of the comments are concluding from the title that open source maintainers should be working on the projects during office hours. That is not what the article is suggesting. From the article - >> anyone can book a 25 minute conversation with me on a Friday to talk about the project. I’m interested in talking to people who are using Datasette, or who are considering using it, or who just want to have a c…

ok, gonna make a meta-comment here: Can you point to such comments? Somehow I keep seeing people say things like this despite there not being any (or only 1-2) comments actually doing the thing they say "a lot of" the comments are doing, and I don't understand it.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#98

Post by Godel_unicode »

thunderbong wrote: post #35

I think a lot of the comments are concluding from the title that open source maintainers should be working on the projects during office hours. That is not what the article is suggesting. From the article - >> anyone can book a 25 minute conversation with me on a Friday to talk about the project. I’m interested in talking to people who are using Datasette, or who are considering using it, or who just want to have a c…

Office hours are work. Soliciting feedback is work. Having a chat about your project is work. Rhetorical jujitsu to make that work sound like not work is at best a failing of empathy.

The tautology that if you want feedback then you want feedback is true. The rest is bullshit.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#99

Post by nxpnsv »

matkoniecz wrote: post #90

I have deep aversion to "Open source projects should run office hours" title. Maybe "Office hours may be a good idea for open source projects"? This would not suggest obligation. In general, fact that someone created or maintains or supports open source projects should not be considered to create any obligations beyond lack of malice and abuse. I am not obligated to support any bugs, create any features and it is per…

I don't think this is about obligations. I feel the developer had a hugely positive experience in inviting interested strangers for 20 minute chats and wanted to spread the positivity. Seems like a nice person, with a nice project, and clearly some extra time available.

Re: Open source projects should run office hours

#100

Post by akavel »

coliveira wrote: post #91
matkoniecz wrote: post #90

I have deep aversion to "Open source projects should run office hours" title. Maybe "Office hours may be a good idea for open source projects"? This would not suggest obligation. In general, fact that someone created or maintains or supports open source projects should not be considered to create any obligations beyond lack of malice and abuse. I am not obligated to support any bugs, create any features and it is per…

You're completely right. However, I notice a change in behavior in developers during the last decade. They view open source as an extension of their duties as software developers, i.e., something that they have to do. Following this point of view, they consider that working on a project brings commitments as if they were in a paid job, and started projecting this belief on others. I think this is very disturbing.

You may have gotten this in reverse direction: it's rather that users of open-source software often desire support, and sometimes speak about it, and developers then tend to have hard time managing psychological boundaries with regards to answering that desire/expectation. Which is generally a nontrivial thing between people in any relation.
Post reply on HN