Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers, Maintainers, Hobbyists)

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>]

On Wednesday, July 08, 2015 10:18:36 PM Jason Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 09:29:57PM +0200, Peter Huewe wrote:
> > > > For testers it's usually even worse - how many patches are actually tested?
> > > > Judging from what I read on LKML not that many.
> > > >
> > > > So we should definitely discuss:
> > > > - how can we encourage hobbyists to become regular contributors
> > > > -- how to keep people interested, the drop-out rates are huge.
> > > 
> > > Here we need to have the correct mindset. Kernel development is hard,
> > > detailed work. It's very rewarding, but simply put, most people aren't
> > > cut out to do it. I view the dropout rate as a *good* thing. It's a
> > > _selection_ process more than a education/training process.
> > > 
> > > With most of the hard jobs in life, take a look at the
> > > training/education program, and you'll see it: 80% drop out rate?
> > > That's selection. Kernel work is one of those 'hard jobs'.
> > > 
> > > This is important to realize because it changes how we view recruitment.
> > > We shouldn't be trying to keep everybody we recruit. Rather, we should
> > > be giving more people trial runs and see how they work out as they learn
> > > the process.
> > > 
> > > iow, if an 80% drop out rate gives us the caliber of dev we need for the
> > > long term health of the community, then it's a numbers game. Say we saw
> > > 40 new people last year, which turned into 8 regular contributors. Now
> > > we want to double that. We can lower the standard to get 16 out
> > > of 40, yuck. Or, we can outreach to 80 for trial runs, and get 16.
> > 
> > I think that's an interesting take on the topic - although I'm not
> > 100% whether I agree with everything.  I agree that our goal is not to
> > lower the standards, and also using more "trial runs".
> > 
> > However high standards should not be the reason to drive people away --
> > and especially not the reason not to keep good people interested.
> 
> Sure, I'm not suggesting anything like testing or anything formal.
> Merely that everyone understand there's an attrition rate, and that's
> *ok*.
> 
> Recruitment, imo, isn't about trying to keep everyone that tries.
> Rather it's about opening the doors and providing real opportunities for
> more people to contribute.

The opportunities are there, but in addition to the opportunities themselves
people need some incentives to use them.  It's all about their time which
they can spend in many ways, some of them more rewarding than others.

If they don't have an incentive, an opportunity itself may not be sufficient.

Thanks,
Rafael