I think it’s obvious (and has been) that the linux kernel needs more contributors and more maintainers to share the load*. The Linux Foundation spending 2% on kernel development in 2024 (page 18) does something but not nearly enough.
Is there a way that we as a community / third parties / non kernel devs can fund kernel developers and maybe even get a kernel maintainer in there? Maybe something already exists or do we have to start something ourselves?
*: Yes, I understand our overworked maintainer problem (being one of these people myself), but here we have people actually doing the work! - Greg KH
That doesn’t seems like a good solution IMO, given how they already spend their money. If you gave 100 bucks today, 2 of that would end up in the kernel. It’s similar to donating to Mozilla to get Firefox funded, but with Mozilla there’s absolutely guarantee that’s where it’ll end up.
That’s one way to do it, but I find it quite indirect. I’m thinking more of the way similar to how Rust For Linux came in: an external org funded developers to work on an aspect of the kernel. We could do the same but the aspect being funding either existing maintainers or contributors aspiring to become maintainers.
This, I agree with in general. Specifically for the linux kernel, overworked maintainers mean there’s something wrong and hopefully spreading the load by funding those willing to contribute and maintain could be a way to do so.
Anti Commercial-AI license
Hmmh, my sentences regarding funding were a bit short. I’m always a bit unsure whether that’s our main concern in Free Software. And whether making it more about money is a good idea to begin with. I mean sure, you’re entirely correct. And developers invest massive amounts of time. And they need to make a living. But for a comptetive offer for a lead position we’re probably talking 6-figures a year for full-time work. And that’s a massive amount for community donations. And more money means more stakeholders, more different interests and non-technical motivations to pay attention to. I mean we probably also don’t want companies to leech from our donations. So how should the developer handle drivers from for-profit-companies? Do they incorporate that on our time? What about laying groundworks for things that later-on get used by a large company? I suppose bringing in community money is going to raise a few questions and it’s going to be complicated… I think it’d have to come with no strings attached. And there’s also always the additional complexity with managing money, keeping an eye on where it goes, hiring the people… And that’s going to require more money or volunteer work… I mean I’m not saying it’s wrong or anything. Just easier said than done…
The thing about the kernel in particular is it’s already mostly about money. With very few exceptions most maintainers are employed by someone, even just the Linux foundation, to work on the kernel full time. There’s very little community involvement outside of the random patches here and there that community members submit. I think what OP is getting at is it would be nice if there was a community sponsored maintainer so it wasn’t all just corporate employees but that likely means providing financial compensation.
And a change in project structure. As of now there are Linux Torvalds and Greg KH for the broader picture. Everyone else is concerned with one (or more) subsystems as far as I know. But they avoid messing with other people’s areas of authority. So with the current project structure, we could appoint someone who deals with a specific field, like Wifi drivers. But I suppose we want more influence than just in one niche. There are a lot of topics of interest to the general public. So I don’t see how that would align with the current project structure, either.