Hi, I am so grateful for your time and patience! Your helps are quite valuable for me to improve my understanding about open source and Geronimo.
On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 09:18 -0600, Russell E Glaue wrote: > comments inline. > > On 03/02/2012 11:58 AM, maxj07 wrote: > > Hi, Russell E Glaue, > > > >> On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 14:57 -0600, Russell E Glaue wrote: > >> I'd like to give an answer since I am not and IBM employee, and actually > >> work at > >> a University-based non-profit organization. > > > > Thank you very much for your kindly reply! I have read it carefully > > and they are quite valuable insights and useful for me to know these > > details about external contributors of Geronimo. > > > >>> 1) It seems that Geronimo gets less external developers after IBM's > >>> support -- I identified external developers through the committer list > >>> on Apache website > >>> (committers not from IBM are regarded as external developers. > > > >> From the outside, it looks like the internal and external developers > >> who are > >> committers have ongoing momentum in working towards specific milestones. > >> It is > >> difficult for non-committers to get onto the bandwagon for working on the > >> same > >> milestones. > >> > >> Those who are not paid by their employer to improve the general viability > >> of > >> Geronimo may only be able, or have time, to target specific items that > >> prevent > >> Geronimo from being usable for them or their employer. > > > > Thanks for the information. So, to my understanding, it looks like those > > committers from IBM are more responsible for the core functionalities > > and roadmap of Geronimo, and the other committers more tend to > > voluntarily contribute to some bug fixes or patches, etc, right? > > There are more committers than just IBM employees. My point about the IBM > employee members is that IBM has invested full-time employees to the project, > and because those employees are smart and dedicated to Geronimo full-time > they > just happen to be members of the community that work on core functionality. > > All committers work on core functionality. But the time their employer or > family > gives them to work on the project is directly related to their level of > contribution to core functionality. > So it is. Super! Thanks for explaining to me. > > > >> Without an easy and widely-usable software application, the community will > >> find > >> it difficult to gain adoption from new users. Without new users, the > >> community > >> will end up having fewer people contributing - I believe this is a sensible > >> attribution. > >> > > That's true. I can't agree more:) > > > >> The ones you term the IBM developers, are all working towards specific core > >> goals at this time, like OSGI compatibility, which is definitely the way > >> the > >> industry needs to go. But, as of today, OSGI is not necessary to publish a > >> general web application for general web user usage. Only us few hard-core > >> geeks > >> see the value and want to use it - though one day it will be necessary. > >> Some, > >> like me, will argue OSGI is long overdue for the industry. > > > > Thanks for sharing! (In fact, I am also fond of OSGi too. I just cannot > > help telling u that the topic of my graduation project when i was an > > undergraduate was using OSGi technique to refactor the kernel of our > > JavaEE application server, namely PKUAS, developed by our institute > > then.) Anyway, i think adopting OSGi technique in Geronimo must be a > > good thing. I mean, see, two other application server i know, JBoss and > > JOnAS are using OSGi now:P > > > > I am an OW2 member. OSGI is long overdue for Geronimo, in my opinion. > Thanks for information. > > > >> Because the IBM developers are working on core goals, there are few magical > >> touches and cosmetic lights (like the neon sign) that attract new users in > >> the > >> same way a bug light attracts bugs. And because the core goals are being > >> worked > >> towards, it is difficult to put the extra magic into the cosmetics until > >> that is > >> done. OSGI needs some cosmetics, for example, to make it "look" attractive > >> to > >> external users who may have no idea what it is. > >> > >> The result is new potential contributors (non-IBM employees), which will > >> have > >> only limited time to contribute, understand less of what is under the > >> hood, and > >> as a result are not able to easily get involved. > > > > It is quite a valuable point and it would be not easily to get more new > > external contributors under this case. Besides, I think maybe there is > > another possibility that the current committers are capable and > > sufficient to develop Geronimo, or maybe if the agenda was tight, IBM > > would put more developers into Geronimo. Can this happen? > > I cannot speak for IBM's commitment. > > As the development of Geronimo progresses, the community will naturally gain > more volunteers. Right now as we are trying to push out 3.0, with OSGI, this > phase is more difficult to get involved in writing code. > > For me, I am focused on what my employer's needs are, and I submit patches > and > work through functionality with other committers. Then I make sure to update > the > documentation which is something I can do to give core developers more time > to > work on code. > > People who are less involved can contribute a lot. They can tailor > documentation > to meet the needs of those who are more novice, or work through Geronimo on > their own and fix language in the documentation accordingly. And testing and > bug > reporting is always welcome. > OK. Thank you! > > > >> Once us external non-committers get involved, we don't see any reason why > >> IBM's > >> resource investment would cause Geronimo to be less desirable as a product. > > > > I'm sorry, but i don't catch the point of the above. Does it mean that > > you have no idea why IBM's investment makes Geronimo less desirable? Or > > you don't think Geronimo is less desirable? Please don't mind, it's my > > problem with english. > > There is no reason why IBM's involvement would ever make Geronimo less > desirable. And those of us who get involved especially see that their > contribution makes Geronimo just more valuable. > > Geronimo is open source, completely. Anyone can make Geronimo better. If > Geronimo does not do something you want, you can write the new functionality > yourself. And if you are willing, contribute it back to the community. > Thanks for your confirmation! > > > >> > >> Though, IBM's resources are probably focused towards specific advancement > >> in > >> Geronimo the company is interested in. But then again, this is the same > >> for my > >> employer which wants me to focus on one specific part of Geronimo to make > >> it > >> usable for it. So that seems like a normal happening. And they go > >> together, for > >> without one, the other may not happen. That is without IBM's continuing > >> investment, my employer may not want to be involved. > >> > > I agree with you. IBM contributed Geronimo a lot. The first time I heard > > of Geronimo was also because IBM, its WAS CE:P > > > >>> > >>> I also observed that JBoss showed the similar phenomena after RedHat > >>> stepped > >>> in. I suppose commercial involvement might hurt people in open source to > >>> some extent, I wonder what it is. > >> > >> Geronimo and JBoss projects probably would benefit from evangelizers who > >> can > >> help gain broader adoption and show off value. > >> > >> The corporate involvement in the OSS projects is to advance the > >> functionality > >> for the corporate entity's use. This benefits the project greatly, but > >> there are > >> no resources put into evangelizing what is created (a.k.a. Marketing). > >> > >> I think this is the detachment. > >> Imagine taking the marketing department out of a typical software company, > >> and > >> ask the developers to promote their software project while also developing > >> the > >> software. For one, the developers are too busy developing. > >> > >> My employer does not want to pay me to market Geronimo to outside > >> interests.. > >> they want me to develop Geronimo into a usable product for their immediate > >> use. > >> > > The lack of Marketing resources might be the reality for open source > > projects, especially when the software is used by technical people other > > than end users like a web browser or operating system, I think. So I > > agree with you, the OSS projects could benefit from combining with > > companies, when the companies would like to provide some marketing > > resources, isn't it? > > How does this puzzle piece fit together? > IBM provides some level of marketing indirectly through WAS's publicizing. > The rest of us just have to use Geronimo and write about it. > > > > >> > >>> > >>> 2) However, I found Geronimo developers stay shorter after IBM supported > >>> it. > >>> I am very curious about two things: > >>> > >>> (i) Only 2 out of 20 developers left before IBM supporting, why are so > >>> few developers leave and so many developers stick to this Open Source > >>> project at that time? Did those developers come from the same company or > >>> work in the same location? > >> > >> Probably at the beginning there was a lot of "marketing" for the project. > >> And > >> just like start-ups, a lot of people want to be a part of it.... for the > >> short-term. Turn over in start-up companies is high. > >> > >> People like me get started at the beginning, but later their employer > >> moves them > >> on to other more immediate issues. But I did come back! > >> > > I'm so glad to know so dedicative people here like you:) > > > > If it's convenient, would you mind tell your story about Geronimo? Like > > how to obtain the commit privilege? I think it might be very hard but a > > lot of fun? I am just curious if i want to participate into an open > > source project, how a long way i need to take. You know, for my > > classmates around me, the problem isn't they don't want to join an open > > source project, they just don't know how to. > > Here are the steps over a timeline: > 1. Pick a project you want to spend at least the next year working on. > 2. Start using the project > 3. Test the project and ask questions on the mail lists. > 4. Answer questions from others on the mail lists. > 5. Help enter real issues into the issue tracking system. > 6. Help update documentation > 7. Write about Geronimo and help evangelize it > 8. Start fixing issues logged in the issue tracker, submit patches and work > with > committers to get them applied. > 9. Find new issues, log them in the issue tracker, and submit patches. > 10. Do steps 1 through 9 enough times (probably a year) that the community > wants > to invite you as a committer > 11. Decide for yourself if you want to remain committed to the project, > long-term for another 2 to 4 years > 12. Accept committer privileges when offered > 13. Be part of discussions about the development and future of the project > 14. Mentor other newbies to the project to go through steps 1 through 13. > > This is not the only path to committer. Others may work for companies who > already have a stake in the OSS. In these cases, their contribution is > already > significant and are able to hire and bring up new committers fast. > > Or if you are experienced and have significant contributions right away, > you'll > get committer access faster when other committers don't want to spend half > their > day applying your contributions :) . > > But if you are a newbie to OSS, the above 14 steps should be good. > Super! I appreciate all of this very much. I am a newbie and this is quite useful for me. > > > >>> > >>> (ii) Whether most of the active contributers were recruited to support > >>> the community after IBM's support? So IBM would decide who is assigned > >>> to work on Geronimo and how long they would stay in the project? > >> > >> This has to do with the start-up syndrome. IBM is committed to the > >> development > >> of Geronimo, so they invest their people into the project long-term. Other > >> companies may not have the same level of commitment. And all the other > >> independent individuals were a part of Geronimo during the initial > >> start-up. > >> Once Geronimo got off the ground, the hype fizzled. > >> > >> Those individuals who are left, and which are not IBM employees like me, > >> still > >> have employers with some level of interest in using Geronimo for the > >> long-term. > >> > > OK, thanks! > > > >> > >> JIRA is not restricted. > >> > > Thanks for confirmation. > > > >> Probably two factors. > >> (1) While Geronimo was still being developed, and working through its > >> growth to > >> super-stability, lots of issues could be reported. And this still is the > >> case as > >> we work from one milestone to the next. > >> (2) The committers can typically use jira issues to track modification to > >> the > >> code. Every subversion commit likely has an associated JIRA that documents > >> the > >> code change. > >> > >> So the fluctuation you see is because of continued development being > >> tracked in > >> JIRAs, and an increase in stability of the base code. > >> > > Exactly, thanks! > > > >> I think it can be said that, for a typical user, if it works, they > >> typically > >> will not want to spend the effort entering a JIRA to address anything that > >> is > >> not a show-stopper for them. > >> > > Right. By the way, I think up one thing not very related to share. I > > heard a story about Gnome, they had ever adopted some automatic > > mechanism(seems like airbag and some plugin) to let users reported bugs > > more easily, like just clicking the mouse or sth like that when the > > software was crashing. My point is, if the software works, it's good, > > but if it doesn't work, maybe we can use some mechanisms to encourage > > users to report:) > > Someone would need to own this, and champion it to successfulness for it to > work > in any OSS project. > > > > >>> > >>> I also found developers are the majority of issue reporters, not only in > >>> Geronimo but also in JBoss nowdays. I was wondering, is that because > >>> JIRA is more for developers now (users are in maillist or forum or smth > >>> like this)? Or, developers are required to report before jumping into > >>> fixing/changing code? > >> > >> The later. See previous. > > Thanks. > >> > > > >> I think everyone in the community today has a personal interest in the > >> advancement of Geronimo that goes beyond their employer. However, Geronimo > >> is > >> software used by technical people, and we contribute what we do best which > >> is > >> code and documentation. > >> > >> If you know of how to get non-technical people (who may not have a clue > >> what > >> Geronimo is) involved who can donate their time to improve the community's > >> general image, increase broader adoption, and increase Geronimo's marketing > >> efforts, please share. > >> > > Definitely. It is not easy to attract more people for software used by > > technical people. About it, i just have two opinions based on my limited > > experience and research results: > > > > 1) maybe try some institutes in universities, i think. Students need the > > fantastic techniques and at least they can try to use Geronimo as a > > platform to build their course projects, like me:) > > > > 2), My research results indeed show collaborating with other > > organizations who have common interests will get an increase on external > > participants. For example, in JOnAS(http://jonas.ow2.org/), also an open > > source JavaEE application server, there is a broader collaboration > > strategy and an increase in external developers. But their problem is > > how to retain those participants longer. > > > > For now, i am not sure if this kind of opinions are useful and they are > > quite rough. How do u think? > > Discussion is the seed of the plant that will bare fruit. > That's just what i need urgently :P > > > > Anyway, if get chance, i'd like to introduce Geronimo and their people > > to everybody i meet:) > > You will make Geronimo a better software project just by doing that alone. > Thanks. > OK. Thanks again for all your help and time! Best wishes, Xiujuan > > > >> Thanks for your interest. > >> -RG > >> > > Thanks again! I appreciate your help very much:) > > > > Xiujuan. > > >
