The date on the first page is ambiguous. 10/03/2023 can be in either the MM/DD/YYYY or the DD/MM/YYYY format. People will be confused about it after October 2023. To avoid confusion, formats like Mar 10 2023 is suggested.
The report is long -- it must be uneasy to prepare the report. Thanks for the effort! On Tue, 2023-04-04 at 19:43 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > Hello Fellow Debian Developers, > > Nearly one year ago the "Debian Developer's Survey about Usage of Money > in Debian" was announced [0]. > > More than 200 of you graciously participated, providing useful and > constructive answers. It is my pleasure to announce that the analysis > of the survey is complete and available for public viewing/comment: > > https://debian.pages.debian.net/dd-surveys/dd-survey-analysis-2022.pdf > > Great pains have been taken to ensure that the report is accurate and > error-free. However, if you happen to notice an error, please direct > feedback to me personally. > > The document is rather long but a copy of the TLDR summary is available > at the end of the mail, feel free to share your comments and questions > on debian-project@lists.debian.org. > > Regards, > > -Roberto > On behalf of the Debian contributors behind Freexian. > > [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2022/04/msg00002.html > > ---- SUMMARY OF THE SURVEY ---- > > This analysis is based on 224 completed surveys. More than half of all > respondents are active in Debian on at least a weekly basis. More than > 90% are involved in maintenance of packages, while more than 80% vote on > General Resolutions. This indicates that contributors to Debian tend to > be involved regularly in both technical and non-technical ways. While > email and mailing lists are the most popular means of communication for > project-related matters and connections between Debian acquaintances and > while nearly all respondents indicated that they use email for > Debian-related communication, fewer than half of respondents indicated > that they actively participate in mailing list discussions. This > indicates that Debian contributors tend to be engaged more in “doing” > than they are engaged in discussions of project-wide matters. > > Without a doubt, the volunteer ethos continues to be at the heart of > what defines the Debian project. Nearly half of all respondents are > active in Debian in a purely personal capacity, which is to say that > they volunteer and are not compensated for their contributions to > Debian. Another nearly half of respondents are active in a mix of > personal and professional capacities, indicating that some of their > contributions are purely volunteer while others of their contributions > are monetarily compensated in some way. This suggests that non-volunteer > or professional motivations play a part in the contributions of at least > half of respondents. > > The team with the lowest view of the sustainability of their current > level of Debian participation was the QA team, with only half indicating > that the current level was sustainable. There were relatively few > respondents overall who viewed their current level of Debian > participation as unsustainable, most of whom also indicated that it > would become sustainable if some of their Debian work were paid. This > would suggest that targeted funding may be able to produce an increase > in the sustainability of Debian participation and that such efforts > should make allowance for both funding of contributors who are already > being funded in some way for some of their participation and also > contributors who are not being compensated for any of their current > Debian contributions. This could be viewed as funding to maintain the > current level of Debian contribution, or possibly to prevent current > contributors from reducing their participation. > > As far as increasing Debian participation, 65% of respondents would like > to spend more time contributing to Debian. More than 80%f of those, 112 > respondents, indicated an answer of “yes” or “maybe, but it would > require important changes in my life” to the question “Could you > increase your involvement if some work was paid?” Given that 50% of > respondents indicated that they contributed in both personal and > professional contexts and given the number who indicated that they > definitely could or maybe could increase their participation if some of > the work was paid, it seems logical to conclude that a substantial > number of Debian contributors contribute to some degree in a > self-employed capacity. This is positive as it means there is a high > likelihood that targeted funding could produce meaningful increases in > Debian participation. In general, there already exist actionable ideas > which survey respondents consider important to the Debian project and > for which funding could presumably be applied in order to aid their > implementation. > > There seems to be broad support for paying people who are already > involved as Debian contributors, but very little support for hiring > contractors, that is to say, those who are not already Debian > contributors in some way. Members of the Security Team were by far the > most supportive towards the idea of paying Debian contributors. > > Concerning specific ideas to fund there is clearly a range of support, > with some ideas (like “Paying for development of new > features/improvements for Debian-specific infrastructure,” “Paying > development of new features/improvements to Debian specific software,” > and “Pay Debian contributors to complete large scale changes in a > reasonable time frame”) having positive support exceeding 80%, to “Pay > Application Managers to ensure we deal with new contributors in a timely > fashion” with a level of positive support below 40%. In general, the > most positively viewed ideas appear to be those with the highest degree > of required technical effort, while the least positively viewed ideas > can be seen to involve much less technical effort. > > As far as funding particular roles, the Security Team and LTS Team were > viewed the most favorably and the Technical Committee and DAM the least > favorably. Of the responses to the “additional roles to fund” question, > DSA was the most often mentioned. > > Respondents were given an opportunity to voice individual concerns about > the impact of funding on Debian (via a free-form text entry on the > survey). As is to be expected when soliciting comments from as large and > diverse a group as the population of Debian Developers, there were > numerous reservations and concerns expressed. The two which were brought > up most frequently had to do with ensuring that Debian project goals and > core volunteer ethos are not subverted by the participation of paid > contributors. Any funding efforts should carefully consider these > concerns and ensure that they are addressed appropriately. > > In summary, there is broad consensus that funding would have a positive > impact, that there are particular ideas/tasks that have a very high > level of positive support for funding among the survey respondents, and > that there are particular roles as well that have a similarly high level > of positive support for being funded. Efforts to introduce funding to > Debian should likely focus on those ideas and roles which have the > highest level of positive support, and then possibly expand as the > concept is proven and refined. >
