KDEvelopers on KDE Users
An anonymous reader writes: "KDE developers spent some time this week on their mailing list discussing what motivates them and the extent to which user concerns figure in their decisions. Dennis E. Powell's column on Linux and Main draws excerpts from the exchange, in which he participated, and says that he believes a lot more of this kind of discussion is needed."
Someone said that Open Source will never effectively work on the desktop, because it's far too unstable; you can't program anything really useful for it without spending a lot of time and money nursing it through the inevitable changes the platforms around it create. I respectfully disagree, because I think that whenever there is a will, there's a way, and that when people need something, they're going to create it or maintain it.
There is a great deal of burnout being created by users demanding features in software that the developer isn't being paid for, too. KDE has mostly escaped this thus far, however there is some speculation that GNOME has more momentum because it's the underdog. Let's hope these two projects can continue to bring great things to the Linux desktop.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Granted not ever OS developer craves attention, and some don't even desire it, but deep down its always welcome.
I'm not an OS developer, but being self-employeed, its sometimes hard to get motivated, other times its very easy.
The OS community needs to become much more appreciative to prevent burnout . The article says it best.
Tournament Management Online &
there were some points like "this is my hobby, my free time, I dont want to be critizised because of what I have done with it", which brought my attention. The user feedback - even in form of critics - is essential for this kind of hobby. If you dont want to be critizised - dont publish it, if you want to become better - ask for it. And if you want the community to answer to your requests, give something back and answer to their ones.
The good software meets its users needs. And hobby or not, if you want to be good in it, users feedback will only make you better.
If you're a KDE developer, either set up a company or, in the short term, actually ACT like you WANT money. They don't - they act like money is some sort of disease and they are so much more holy because money doesn't enter in to their development mindset. If you WANT money, COMPORT yourself like you DESERVE money. "CODE IT YOURSELF", "THIS IS MY HOBBY", etc. don't get you many people who want to give you money. Contrast this with the Snort story - it WAS a hobby, but the guy treated it like a business. That's a niche market. If KDE developers rallied together, many could make a decent living just making a good DE and making it easy to develop good apps for it. KBASIC would be something we could pay $ for if
1. It helped create good, stable apps which ran on multiple versions of KDE (within reason)
2. It had a good installation routine.
One shell file, RPM or a few binaries that could install the KDE app in multiple platforms (Alpha, Intel, etc) with a good VE under the KBASIC banner would be worthy of $49 -> $99 easily. Instead, projects like this linger on in 'hobby' mode for YEARS.
creation science book
I've been wanting to help the KDE project myself, my main interest being noatun (I believe its interface is a bit lacking). Being no expert I contacted noatun's coordinator on my thoughts, he said sure jump in and help. Since then I've been looking at the KDE architecture documents, it's a very impressive architecture (I think most C++ programmers would agree with me) that has opened up my mind to the possibilities of extensibility. But at the same time it is also a daunting architecture, I just want to learn a small part of it, but to do that I have to learn about most of it. Some people may disagree, but for a hobbyist amature programmer, it sure is. I hope someday I will be able to contribute, but for now I'm still learning.
The role of creator carries with it a certain burden, that by being the creator, it is inherently difficult to accept/deal with criticism or "suggestions." You pour so much into your creation, and when all you get is, "How you can make this better" it starts to undermine your motivation and animation. I mean, that's why normally programmers in larger companies don't deal with end users.
One: The company knows that programmers are grouchy creative types and aren't especially good talking to l-users.
Two: If they (programmers) hear all the complaints or "suggestions" they will just get frustrated and demotivated.
I can say this is true from personal experience. I work for a small company, where I am both programmer and tech support. I find that I slip into despair about the job I have done less when someone else deals with the tech support "issue." Since, clients/users don't call you to tell you how wonderful your product is, or how they love X feature, or how it's the greatest thing since sliced bread... you are left dealing with the nitpicks (some legitimate and some not).
It ends up making you kick the cat a lot *G*.
So, my advice is to pat your friendly neighborhood developer on the back more often. Talk about what you LOVE in a separate email all by itself. Don't combine a "I love X feature... but...". If yer gonna compliment, send an email with JUST that.
Feature request should be polite and humble. Try to be more questioning (Socratean method), rather than demanding. Lead the programmer to make the same conclusion that you have, but don't just throw it in his face. Lead him to it with questions. He will feel empowered, not helpless and frustrated and put upon. You are building teamwork, not a master-slave relationship.
Toddlers are the stormtroopers of the Lord of Entropy.
A couple years ago, the alpha geek where I work, who has since moved on the do kernel hacking somewhere else, made an off hand remark that he hated it when people used the stuff he wrote.
"That's odd," I replied. "We write programs to solve people's problems."
"No," he shot back. "I code because I like to code. As soon as a user gets hold of it, all he does is start complaining and asking for more features."
Which is true enough, I've since learned. Users' wants are ill-defined as well as infinite.
This all reminds me of my Software Development Rules from a few months ago.
Software Wars
We just write the code that we want, and sometimes that happens to fall under a users' request, after all, developers are users too.
This attitude is a problem for the future of Open Source. See, there's no reason why we can't, as a community, topple the vast majority of proprietary software in a few years time. But it would take a serious entrepreneurial effort. How so? Well, we need to establish a way for geek and non-geek users alike to fund free software developers to work full time on their pet projects and add a stronger incentive to listen to our feature requests. I think the best way to do this is some type of "code bounty" that can be placed on desired features. Put funds into an escrow until somebody comes along and fulfils the need. Then, that person gets the reward. And make a system by which many people can contribute to a bounty through micropayments, so that even casual users can help out in their small way. Say there's a needed feature missing in Mozilla and 300 frustrated people around the world each pitch in on average $5. That'd be a pretty tempting reward for a project that may take an experienced programmer only a few days to complete. Or, on a larger scale, businesses could become "patrons" to a project and by doing so gain a proportional say in directing development towards their own needs.
Don't get me wrong. There are dozens of other ways to encourage focused OSS development, but it's all about capitalism. Some folks like RMS seem to ignore this, but it's the truth. Open Source needs commercialized so that we geeks can get paid for doing what we love. Keep the software free as in GPL, but let people put their money where their mouth is.