Lars Kurth Community Manger, Xen Project Chairman, Xen Project Advisory Board Director, Open Source, Citrix Lars Kurth
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Lars Kurth Community Manger, Xen Project Chairman, Xen Project Advisory Board Director, Open Source, Citrix lars_kurth Was a contributor to various projects Worked in parallel computing, tools, mobile and now virtualization Long history in change projects Community guy at Symbian Foundation Learned how NOT to do stuff Community guy for the Xen Project Working for Citrix Accountable to Xen Project Advisory Board Chairman of Xen Project Advisory Board 250000 200000 150000 More than 1 Projects Million Today 100000 Projected 50000 0 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Source: The 2013 Future of Open Source Survey Results Late 90’s Today Individuals & Hobbyist's Still about Individuals But, a majority are employees Companies have a huge stake Features How many users you have How many vendors back you How you are seen in the press … Different Management Disciplines can help you succeed Neutrality / Perception Support Infrastructure Expertise / Mentoring Vendor Network … BUT: You still need to do all the right things Case Study An Open Source Hypervisor > 10M Users Powering some of the biggest Clouds in Production Amazon Web Services, Rackspace Public Cloud, Terremark, … Several sub-projects Xen Hypervisor (including Xen on ARM), XAPI management tools, Mirage OS Linux Foundation Collaborative Project Sponsored by Amazon Web Services, AMD, Bromium, Calxeda, CA Technologies, Cisco, Citrix, Google, Intel, NetApp, Oracle, Samsung and Verizon 10 years old Four Key Issues Symptoms Consequences for Xen Fixes that were applied Effect this had (there may be others) Magnifying effect At the end : Reflection & Tools Unwritten Rules Undefined Roles Lack of Upfront Collaboration Hard to join the project Vendors got frustrated Hard to work with the project Another key vendor nearly dropped Xen Roadmap 1st KVM & Release Management Growth potential release was limited early Canonical drops Xen Technical RedHat drops Coordination Xen in RHEL6 Team Xen Governance Xen becomes LF Collaborative Project 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Developer list traffic : Q3 2003 - now 120 Mirage OS XAPI Xen 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013(Q3) Source: Git Repos + GitDM 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 (H1) UPC Spectra Logic Redhat iweb GridCentric Calxeda Fujitsu (Misc) AWS (Academia) John Hopkins University AMD Linaro Oracle NSA Intel (Individual) Suse Citrix Theory: vendor neutrality = more contributors Early indicators: Individual Contributors have doubled Advisory Board members are becoming contributors Momentum in new market segments is building Advisory Board is developing a long term project Vision Creating incentives to become more mature Created “pain for distros” Inwards focus – Not working with upstreams Intercommunity Friction (branched kernel and QEMU) – Not working with distros Introvert Community (users are not “our” problem) Image Problem Upstream QEMU complete Linux Host support for Xen Linux Guest IBM, VMware, Red Hat and Citrix support for Xen Agree on PVOPS in Linux kernel Actively working with distros 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Developer list traffic : Q3 2003 - now Improved Relationships & Trust Xen Developers Care about Users Xen becoming easier to use Improved Image in the media and FOSS community Significant increase in Goodwill from the LINUX community Working with upstream & downstream projects is easier Collaboration happening earlier than in the past Automotive, Mobile, Embedded Empty Promises Change of Guard Focus on events for the existing community only Enough Papers Blog 1 Person Enough Talks Enough Communication By enough vendors Competing Projects Excelled at Communication 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Developer list traffic : Q3 2003 - now Project became an “invisible man” Belief that Xen is not open source Slowed the growth of the user base Perception: the project is “dead” Constant stories in the press that the project is dying First: Defiance – this is all “Fud” Then: Project started to believe this too Community spokespeople Events v2 Community Blog Confidence Building 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Developer list traffic : Q3 2003 - now Project perception has changed dramatically Neutral to positive (example: eWeek “How Xen got its Zen back”) No more Xen bashing Talks / Events / Orgs 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 (Q3) Two very successful Press Releases Powerful message (that is true, but was not told/heard before) Linux Foundation Expertise Press Releases and other LF channels Coaching and supporting of community members Xen Project Advisory Board : Marketing and PR Committee What is the Future for the Project? PR Working Group Community spokespeople Events v2 Community Blog Confidence Building 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Developer list traffic : Q3 2003 - now Press clips 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Q4 2012 Q1 2013 Q2 2013 Q3 2013 Community Companies Within Citrix : via the process of “giving up control” Big enough plan to catch the attention of senior management Forced decision makers in the hierarchy to consider the value of F/OSS Amongst companies supporting the project financially Forced decision makers in contributors to go through a similar process Governance and Neutrality Matter Projects don’t exist in isolation Poor Marketing and Communication can kill you Good project sponsors can make a difference Being part of a Foundation can make a big difference A project needs to constantly evolve License & Development Model Linux (but also BSDs) are key components in a Xen stack Most Xen contributors were Linux Foundation members Vendor Friendly Strengths: PR, User Outreach, Events Management, … Multi-discipline Complexity Follow Industry News Follow Project News Think of the funnel boundary as a Trial Software permeable membrane, not a fixed border Adopt Software It can take >2 years for changes at Engage with Users the top of the funnel to make a difference at the bottom Engage with Industry The Funnel has feedback loops: what happens at the top can affect Evangelize the bottom Customize Contribute Lead Project Scope E.g. Xen on ARM, Mirage OS Follow Industry News Increase the width and thus the potential market for the project Follow Project News Trial Software Activities Attributes Events Adopt Software Control the permeability and shape of the funnel Engage with Users Some items are in your control Others - such as what the competition does - are not! Engage with Industry Evangelize Customize How can we influence how the Contribute Community Funnel works? Lead Follow Industry News Follow Project News Trial Software On-boarding Documentation Adopt Software Ease of Use Engage with Users Training Engage with Industry Evangelize Customize Example: Factors influencing early Contribute stages of open source software adoption Lead Follow Industry News Bad Press Follow Project News Trial Software Funnel becomes Adopt Software narrower More People drop out Engage with Users Engage with Industry Example: Negative feedback loop Evangelize Customize Negative Feedback: Contribute vendors may stop contributing Lead The Community Funnel is an excellent internal sales tool Reason: Sales and Business people understand funnels It helps you understand what is happening It helps prioritize what to focus on Covers the time dimension : some issues take longer to fix than others Forces you to consider the “Big Picture” Extend Project Scope Follow Industry News Press Social Media Brand Follow Project News Event Presence Communication Trial Software WebSite Documentation Getting Started Adopt Software Ease of Use Distros Training Engage with Users Support Engage with Industry Volunteer Programs Evangelize Community Programs 2011 Customize Platforms for Self Promotion Contribute Collaboration Values Diversity Lead Governance Neutrality Business Opportunities ExtendARM +Project Mirage Scope OS Follow Industry News Press Social Media Brand Follow Project News Event Presence Communication Trial Software WebSite Documentation Getting Started Adopt Software Ease of Use Distros Training Engage with Users Support Engage with Industry Volunteer Programs Evangelize Community Programs NOW Customize Platforms for Self Promotion Contribute Collaboration Values Diversity Lead Governance Neutrality Business Opportunities ExtendARM +Project Mirage Scope OS Follow Industry News Press Social Media Brand Follow Project News Event Presence Communication Trial Software WebSite Documentation Getting Started Adopt Software Ease of Use Distros Training Engage with Users Support Engage with Industry Volunteer Programs Evangelize Community Programs NOW Customize Platforms for Self Promotion (areas that so far benefited from Contribute Collaboration Values Diversity being in the Linux Lead Governance Neutrality Business Opportunities Foundation) To succeed, a wide range of “community” and “management” tools need to be applied continuously Please rate the talk on slideshare or twitter www.slideshare.net/xen_com_mgr/ For all Product Names Segoe UI Light Segoe UI Semibold Flickr: Xen Project: “Messy Apartment” by Ryo Chijiiwa www.xenproject.org wiki.xenproject.org “The Ivory Tower” by Daniel Parks lists.xenproject.org “Desert Road 9” by LabyrinthX xenbits.xenproject.org @xen_org “Cotton Plant” by Aileen “Giant Sequoia Trees” by Raj ##xen “Damselfly caught in sundew” by Mysserli Funnel: Other Images: talesfromthecommunity.wordpress.com By Lars Kurth or aquired .