Slashdot Mirror


How To Hire Great Open Source Developers?

An anonymous reader writes "This is the first article I've ever read specifically about hiring open source developers, and how to judge their ability not just to code but to work with others. It's reprinted over at ITMJ [part of OSDN, as this site is] from a book by Martin Fink, the General Manager for HP's Linux Systems Division. Brings up a lot of good points, including how you need to make sure your open source people are developing things (on company time) that do the company some good, not just scratching their own itches. Fun quote: 'Discover what pseudonyms your candidate uses online. Look at the archives at SlashDot and other online locales. Does your candidate hide behind secret pseudonyms to trash other individuals? Is there passion without condemnation?'"

16 of 246 comments (clear)

  1. Hmm, I dunno. by samcentral2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Discover what pseudonyms your candidate uses online. Look at the archives at SlashDot and other online locales. Does your candidate hide behind secret pseudonyms to trash other individuals? Is there passion without condemnation?" Hmm, I dunno. Sounds like someone might get disqualified just the project-manager doesn't like their opinions. /. writes about more than just OSS you know.

    1. Re:Hmm, I dunno. by moranar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I shouldn't have to say this, but "ideally" (in planet Nice, with the pink fluffy rabbits) a project manager would take note about wether you hide behind a nickname to flame and troll, wether you were quick to anger, etc. (the qualities that make you less fit for a job involving human relationships) and not your opinions.

      The downside: some OSS / FS grand masters would probably _never_ be hired based on what they say on /. . Of course, this shouldn't be the only criterion, but still...

      Of course, this isn't planet Nice, and your opinions will become known sooner or later. One is what one is, after all. Holding strong opinions or beliefs was never meant to be easy. But if you don't want to be judged by what you say, (hint hint) don't say it on the net.

      --
      "I think it would be a good idea!"
      Gandhi, about Internet Security
    2. Re:Hmm, I dunno. by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sounds like someone might get disqualified just the project-manager doesn't like their opinions.

      A project manager who would disqualify a potential candidate based on the candidate's personal opinions is not the kind of project manager worth working for.

      Just because someone is [insert favorite offensive/questionable attribute] that doesn't mean thet the person can't be a great developer.

      Then again, sometimes, personal opinion matters.

      --
      .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    3. Re:Hmm, I dunno. by Alomex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I shouldn't have to say this, but "ideally" (in planet Nice, with the pink fluffy rabbits) a project manager would take note about wether you hide behind a nickname to flame and troll, wether you were quick to anger, etc. (the qualities that make you less fit for a job involving human relationships) and not your opinions.

      I don't know if the comparison is relevant. It is a bit like trying to predict how you will behave in a business meeting judging from a tape of the football game you attended with your buddies last weekend. Not much can be inferred, if you ask me. /. is an informal forum of peers. Work is a professional setting with colleagues. Sure, extremely aggressive behaviour in /. is unlikely to be curtailed when at work, but if we are to extend this to general pettiness, I think this pretty much would disqualify anybody who ever posted or moderated here in /.

    4. Re:Hmm, I dunno. by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Personal opinions on unrelated matters may if you are trying to build a company culture. And you probably don't want to hire a blatant racist to a mixed race workplace. But more important than the opnions themselves, are how they chose to express their opinions. And how they reacts to people with different opinions.

    5. Re:Hmm, I dunno. by killmenow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Checking post history on /. is, imho, a bit like following you to a local "watering hole" and listening to the conversations that ensue.

      /., as with most Internet sites I actually post, is a place to hang out and blow off steam. That is its purpose for a lot of people.

      I'm certain if you looked over my posts, you might see an overall cynical trend. You'd probably get, just from my nick alone that I'm fed up with things. I don't come here looking for solutions to what ails me. I come here to commiserate. But that is worthless information in a hiring situation. Unless you think people should *never* complain, and are one of those "I'm upbeat 100% of the time!" people who really thinks supposedly motivational platitudes on posters are meaningful, you're probably an idiot, a fool, or corrupt.

      Personally, I think looking at /. for any guidance on any decision is foolhardy.

  2. Good article, but one thing irritates me by Underholdning · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This seems like it was written during the dot-com bubble. Quote from the article: However, that person may also have very clear expectations that the only projects they will ever work on are open source projects. This is simply not true. Being an open source developer is not a religion. It just means that you believe in the idea. There's absolutely no problem for an open source developer to make closed source for a living. And, more importantly, open source developers (and the comunity) has no beef with that.
    Remember - we need to eat as well. While open source gives us satisfaction, closed source gives us our daily bread.

  3. Personal Time by mccalli · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article: "You need to clearly define when and how your engineers can participate in open source projects on their personal time, and define the disclosure rules for your employees. Local employment laws may limit restrictions on your employees."

    Damn right law might limit restrictions. My time is mine. Not a company's, mine. That's the very definition of personal time. I am not employee #3877643 away from the office, I am a human being who does work for a company during certain prescribed times and under certain prescribed circumstances.

    They might well have legitimate rights over what I can contribute, but certainly not when if 'when' is part of my personal time.

    Cheers,
    Ian

    1. Re:Personal Time by mccalli · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Wrong, the company owns you. Those are the terms you agree to when you get hired.

      Maybe in your private hell, or in the dreams of the HR department, but certainly not in reality - no. That's the whole point about local laws limiting that right.

      For example, after stating that I was taking three weeks off following the birth of my son, I started getting phone calls about simple development questions that could easily have waited or been worked out by others. I politely reminded the people involved a couple of times, and put the phone down on them the next. No further calls.

      For example, shortly before midnight 31st Dec 1999 I was called asking if I could just log on to a machine in Singapore to watch a log when the millenium ticked over. Answer - no, absolutely not.

      For example, in the middle of moving house I was told to drop what I was doing and come into the company. Answer? No - of course not. If I don't complete the move I have nowhere to sleep tonight...

      People should stop behaving in such a sheep-like fashion. Actually posting that a company 'owns' you and believing it? Good god man - for once the cliche applies, go out and get a life. And a backbone to go with that life - you'll need it at times when dealing with people who are trying to own you...

      Cheers, Ian

  4. Re:Answer: you don't by standard+method · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now, at the risk of feeding the trolls, I do take exception to this sort of attitude.

    There are lots of talented out of work people, be they developers, programmers, graphic designers, musicians, teachers, astrophysicists, lawyers, actors... I could go on, but, you know, I don't really want to. People don't always get hired simply for their skillsets. I've said before that some of the most talented people don't get hired because of a lack of specific skills in other areas. People lose jobs, or lose bids on jobs/contracts, because they can't handle talking to "real people." Obviously that's not the only reason, but that's a big one. My father works for a school board, and there are people who would love to work as a teacher, but are terrible in social situations. On the flip side of things, we have programmers who are less than the most competent people in their literal field that don't get hired because they can't work with other people.

    I for one know I wouldn't want to hire someone, regardless of their boundless talent, if they were a flaming dickhead.

    --
    "I'll be a killer whale, when I grow up"
    -Wintersleep
  5. I love this one by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > Can he/she give examples of contributions that were
    > better than his/her own implementations?

    Good way to sort out the "programming god in their own minds" geeks.

  6. Re:It really should have helped me by cookie_cutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Umm, you likely already know this, but your boss is probably lying to you, and simply didn't let it slip since that would have given you a stronger position during contract negotiations.

  7. There's a reason why the owl goes masked by sielwolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    (or whatever that Watchmen quote is)

    'Discover what pseudonyms your candidate uses online....'

    BS, I say. There are many reasons why people take nom de plumes and pseudonyms, but all come back to the fact that "-and I just wanted a certain level of anonymity". Not fullblown anonymity, just enough to make your online personal dealings disjoint from any sort of RL responsibilities you have.

    There's a reason why you're not supposed to talk about religion, politics, and all that stuff on first dates or job interviews: because it's inappropriate (unless the job is, obviously, at a church, for a political party, etc.). Employees are expected to leave their personal lives at the door when at the job. But employers should feel peachy about betraying that same confidence?

    When writing some free COM app or TPS report coversheet, what does an employee's view on gay marriage, Palestine, or the RIAA have to do with anything? And even if the employer was doing something as inoccuous as suggested in the article and just "seeing if they are passionate without compromise"... who here doesn't think they could find something they'd hold against you?

    Candidates are looking for jobs, not friends. Neither should employers.

    --
    What is music when you despise all sound?
  8. Slashdot ID's and other covert behavior... by UpLateDrinkingCoffee · · Score: 3, Insightful
    What ever happened to checking references and the good old probationary period? It takes a very unique individual to realize that someone's opinion can be intelligent while disagreeing with it. In fact, sometimes I will even play devil's advocate to spark an interesting discussion... will the background checker have the insight to look past all that?

    Let me prove myself on the job I'm hired to do and please leave my slashdot account, my credit score, my medical history, and my weekly garbage to myself thank you.

  9. Re:Ability to work with others? by silverbax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The issue here is that tech guys often are terrible communicators, or worse, actually difficult to work with.

    This is why so many tech guys complain constantly about how management is clueless as to their contribution, or does not give them adequate support, etc. It's caused in large part by the tech community being very territorial and often antagonistic. It makes it much easier for the business managers to sit in an isolated room and make decisions about the tech staff without actually discussing it with them.

    Yes, most of us work in environments where isolation is the preferred method ( the foolishness of bullpens and pair programming notwithstanding ), but somebody (hey - maybe you, tech guy!) has to explain to the power-that-be how isolation is a requirement, or how having a redundant code repository isn't just a nice idea.

    Who's going to explain it to them if the programmers and hardware guys can't? Who's going to explain to the new guy working on some of your old code those little nuances for deployment, freeing you up for that new codebase development?

    That's where your 'ability to work with others' comes in handy, and that's why a smart company wants that skill in their tech staff.

  10. Re:Volunteering is an indication of skill and pass by Sax+Maniac · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Bull. We don't get paid anywhere near as much as lawyers do, when they're not bonoing. Lawyers can afford to do so.

    (And before you accuse me of being greedy, I do contribute to open-source projects in my spare time.)

    --
    I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.