KDE needs 'contributors, not users'--really?

Occasionally, intelligent conversation erupts online--this time as the KDE open-source community tries to figure out whether it needs users or simply contributors. Jason Harris suggests:

KDE, like many other open-source projects, doesn't really need users at all, whether they are poisonous or not. What we need are contributors: that's the life-blood of our community, what keeps KDE growing and evolving. To the extent that users can and do become contributors, I will grant that we need a userbase as a pool of potential future contributors. But I am simply baffled by any argument that we "need" to have a large number of people that never do more than use KDE.

Given that Harris is apparently not trying to make a living directly from KDE, his view is understandable. It is true that open-source projects flourish when people contribute code, rather than passively digest others' code.

But for anyone hoping to build a business around an open-source project, users are critical (even if one of Harris' KDE compatriots may not think so). Who else is going to buy support/add-ons/etc.?

With that in mind, it's important to remember what will make an open-source project relevant to contributors. The answer? Users. Also, who is going to indicate to the contributors/developers which features are important to satisfy their needs and encourage more users? Users. It's a virtuous cycle. The more users, the more contributors (salaried and otherwise), and the better informed those contributors are.

The real challenge in my view is in figuring out how to turn a significant percentage of users into customers, but then again I'm coming at the question from the exact opposite perspective of Harris. With enough (paid) users, contributors can also be paid/encouraged to participate. Just look at what IBM, Intel, Red Hat, and others have done for Linux.

In sum, I think Harris has missed the forest (users) for the trees (contributors), and KDE suffers as a result.

[ferretboy88]

I like Gnome better.

[alegr]

Who needs users? We don't care. Screw them. They are not able to appreciate all the coolest 1001 customizeable settings. They're only whining, and are not paying for it, because it's free.

[The_Decider]

Matt, you are not a programmer. You are a businessman so greed taints your perspective. Programmers care about doing a quality job. It is true that users feed development but the growth Linux is experiencing are from people who couldn't contribute anything meaningful anyway. Why should a project that is unfettered by a profit motive care about those people? They are certainly happy that those people are having a positive experience, but at the end of the day it doesn't effect development, therefore it is irrelevant to the progress of the project. KDE4 needs more development, IMO it is not ready for mass consumption. KDE 3.5 is rock solid, efficient, simple to use, perhaps the best desktop environment of any OS.

[akiba_freak]

As an open source programmer, I'd have to say that not a programming project not needing users is as absurd as a book author that doesn't need readers.
Akiba - FreakLabs

[akiba_freak]

Oops...found a bug in my post...
As an open source programmer, I'd have to say that a programming project not needing users is as absurd as a book author that doesn't need readers. Akiba - FreakLabs

[kenneth.barber]

Its a balance - users bring feature requests - yes - but can they fulfill them? Having done open-source development myself - the ratio of users to contributors is quite important. While I sort of agree with your view about users - your a user so your view is mildly biased - sorry dude. Ideas people are everywhere - 'Hey can you add this feature XyZ it will be sooo cool'. Its the 'do-ers' that we lack. Its easy to ***** about a product, much like we ***** about government or the environment.

About contributors - I think part of the problem is the entry level required to contribute to some of these projects once they reach a certain evolutionary stage. Sure - I could write a plugin for this/that/other project ... but to improve the core, this usually involves a lot of time, effort and sacrifice most good programmers can't afford.

Either you go to a business model that works - such as paid-for-support or something (time will tell) - or somehow you start requiring companies to put time back into software - something most companies don't do unless they are huge and have an open mind. I don't have the answers, which is why I'm just a pleb ... but time will bring us answers.

[RamboTribble]

Elitism is a dangerous commodity. It has brought down individuals, companies and even entire countries. It is disheartening to see it threaten one of the most eminent of Open Source projects.

[Arthur Belle Dent]

One thing Ive noticed last week when SJVN (or as we call him around the office: Mister Do-you-know-who-I-am-?) started this 3 part hatchet job on KDE4 is that the best Linux analyst is a commenter on Linux Today by the name Greygeek:

Two of his posts about this topic:
http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2008-07-02-011-26-OP-KE-DV-0002
http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2008-07-01-010-26-OP-KE-DV-0002

He reminds us about this thing called context:

" Here is his summary of his posting, which many KDE4 antagonists seem to ignore:

I'm happy to see lots of people using our software,
and I hope they find it useful and enjoyable.
But in terms of what we *need* for the continued vitality of the project?
We need contributors, not users. "

Skip lines 1,2,3 and line 4 becomes more inflammatory.

The great thing about the blogosphere (hate that word) is that bloggers can take things out of context and it helps getting more page views. Its actually more profitable to do so..
And you realize that the Greygeeks of the world are actually better at this stuff.

Decider is right about developers caring about writing good clean code that works efficiently.
That is what they do. Theyre life is not lived on the desktop but in a confusing myriad ot letter and numbers. Their battles arent the ones of the user.
That I believe is a big problem of any free software project, you cant have developers and engineers on every job. You need marketing savvy, management and people skills.
Those arent the fortes of geeks.

Akiba, I dont know what kind of programmer you are but I have yet to meet a user that has helped me code a piece of software. I can have the test it and run it and tell me what they would like but to program, I dont need them.
Guess what, the engineers who made your car didnt need your input UNTIL the final stages where you get to choose color and options.

[Eruaran]

Yes KDE need contributors, NOT users.

Do you understand what that means in the KDE community ?

Did you not notice that Harris didn't say you need to be a coder ?

If you submit a bug report, you're a contributor.
Brainstorming ? You're a contributor.
Feedback ? You're a contributor.

It may only be a small contribution, but lots of small contributions add up to a very big plus. Whatever little thing you contribute, you're a contributor and THAT'S what KDE needs.

How does a passive user help KDE ?