I used to annoy people (I imagine - certainly Guido never liked the term) by insisting that Python needed marketing. The PSF could, perhaps, extend its outreach efforts to sponsors by trying to overcome the perceived barriers that you mention here.
If we could find some way to make Python support a way to gain kudos in the corporate world we could perhaps find chances to expound the real benefits of open source collaboration. Would it be worth my making inquiries with the Foundation, or am I just dreaming?
“You may call me a dreamer …” – John Lennon
That corporate entities and others don’t contribute back due to their (in my eyes, false) perception of the core devs as stand-offish, unwelcoming or similarly unapproachable.
Yes, I have many. Turns out they’ll happily talk to the Microsoft guy
Most recently was the email from the company who have (allegedly) reduced GIL overhead by 20-30% on Windows by tweaking some timeouts, but they saw that “the community” was not interested in contributions from companies (emailing me was their final “just in case”, and I haven’t seen them since so perhaps I wasn’t convincing enough when I said “yes! Yes! Yes!”).
I have plenty of others too. We filled a room last year with trillions of dollars worth of Python users to chat about their problems and concerns, and “pushback” from “the community” for even existing was a big one.
There’s a lot of complexity around this area though - we’re literally talking about people who disagree with each other’s core values, which is a touchy area. So I’m not putting it all out in public right now. But some of us (outside of the PSF) are actively engaging these groups to try and encourage better communication and collaboration.
I’m glad that these conversations are taking place, and hope it will help that there is clear and visible trust and cooperation between the Python Software Foundation and Microsoft, at least at the level of PyCon support. These connections have been forged over a long time, and not without initial distrust on each side.
I suspect it will be helpful if Microsoft can actively seek to dissociate themselves from “UNIX (and, by implication, the rest of open source) is snake oil” and open source communities can judge companies and corporations principally by their actions.
Handsome is as handsome does, and credit is due for trying. We have a new world to build.
Perhaps you’d care to explain how the last 3-4 years have not yet shown that, and what else could be done to further convince you?
I’m not getting on the defensive here, but I have definitely noticed that people who are paying attention already see this, and those who don’t recognize it often haven’t looked in 10+ years. It makes it very difficult for actions to have an impact when people who aren’t even looking are saying they aren’t there.
Fair enough. I’m not that closely in touch with the Microsoft world any more, but even my sparse knowledge informs me that good things have been happening for some time now and with increasing momentum. I suppose, therefore, I was expressing outdated views.
The dilemma of which you speak will unfortunately only be resolved after a longer continuous period of productive engagement with open source - it took a long time to dig that particular hole, it will take a long time to fill it in. Things certainly are moving in the right direction, though.
Thanks for taking the time to point out my misconceptions.
