►
Description
Join us for Kubernetes Forums Seoul, Sydney, Bengaluru and Delhi - learn more at kubecon.io
Don't miss KubeCon + CloudNativeCon 2020 events in Amsterdam March 30 - April 2, Shanghai July 28-30 and Boston November 17-20! Learn more at kubecon.io. The conference features presentations from developers and end users of Kubernetes, Prometheus, Envoy, and all of the other CNCF-hosted projects
The Real Costs of Open Source Sustainability - VM (Vicky) Brasseur, Juniper Networks
In 2016 Nadia Eghbal released "Roads and Bridges: The Unseen Labor Behind Our Digital Infrastructure," which shines a light on how few people maintain the software that underpins a large amount of the internet and the services that run on it. The software world has rallied around Open Source Sustainability. Going with what they know, folks mostly focus on paying FOSS developers. Funding drives were funded. Foundations were founded. Startups started up. Venture capitalists ventured that capital. Money isn't the only part of sustainable FOSS projects. Sustainability is a multi-faceted concept that can't work if people focus on only one of its many elements. This talk will: * Review literature around the concept of sustainability * Propose a definition that more accurately details what "sustainable" means to FOSS * Provide tips for starting with your FOSS sustainability efforts
https://sched.co/NrtM
A
So
in
2016,
Nadia
eggball
released
this
roads
and
bridges
the
unseen
labor
of
our
digital
infrastructure.
This
is
a
142
page
report
from
the
Ford
Foundation
and
it
shines
a
light
on
the
woeful
state
of
many
critical
open-source
software
projects
and
the
unfortunate
situations
of
some
of
the
people
who
maintain
it
now,
prior
to
Nadia's
report,
very
few
people
outside
of
the
immediate
free
and
open
source
software
communities.
A
Few
people
knew
how
poor
of
a
state
some
open
source
projects
were,
how
few
people
maintain
the
software
that
is,
the
foundation
of
a
large
amount
of
the
Internet
and
the
services
that
run
on
it.
However,
after
her
report,
a
lot
of
the
software
industry
was
now
very
suddenly
aware
of
the
dire
situation
faced
by
many
open
source
projects.
Many
of
them
their
companies
were
built
upon.
A
However,
Nadia's
report
called
attention
to
it
to
everyone
now
these
people,
who
were
suddenly
very
shocked,
to
learn
what
was
going
on
with
free
and
open
source
software
that
there
were
very
few
maintained,
errs
for
some
projects
and
that
some
projects
did
not
have
the
resources
required
to
be
sustainable.
Now
these
people
being
software
people
being
in
the
software
industry,
they
did
what
software
people
know
how
to
do
very
well.
They
started
building
software
to
collect
money.
A
There
has
been
a
flood
of
newly
launched
initiatives
and
endeavors
directed
towards
getting
funding
money
to
open
source
project.
Maintainer
x',
the
ones
you
see
on
the
Green
are
just
a
few
of
the
endeavors
that
have
been
launched
for
this
purpose.
Getting
money
to
maintain
errs.
That
is
all
they
really
do.
Most
of
these
are
VC
funded.
They
have
venture
capitalists
giving
them
money
because
the
VC
think
they
can
get
money
from
it,
but
there
are
some
nonprofits
out
here.
A
For
instance,
Mozilla
is
a
non-profit
libero
Pei
is
a
nonprofit,
but
most
of
these
are
VC
funded
and
those
were
just
a
few
of
them
and
there
are
more
on
the
way
because
of
what
I
do
for
a
living.
I
have
people
come
to
me
and
ask
for
advice
on
their
new
open
source
initiatives
and
I?
Have
people
speak
to
me
about
hey?
A
Now.
All
of
these
initiatives
focus
on
money,
and
this
is,
despite
the
reports
very,
very
clear,
focus
on
a
multi-faceted
approach
to
infrastructure
maintenance,
but
people
in
our
industry
for
people
in
software,
unfortunately
sustainable
seems
to
equate
completely
to
funded
you're
only
sustainable.
If
you
have
money
so
funding
is
naturally
where
they
focus,
as
is
very
often
the
case.
It
feels
like
the
software
industry
is
reinventing
the
wheel
rather
than
investigating
how
other
businesses,
how
other
initiatives,
how
other
industries
have
already
solved
this
problem.
A
Now
the
Brundtland
report
was
published
by
the
United
Nations
in
1987,
so
that
is
many
decades
ago.
People
have
been
talking
about
this
and
came
up
with
a
plan,
and
it
was
published
after
many
years
of
international
discussions
about
the
environment
and
corporate
development.
Now
what
the
report
discovered
is
that
it
is
impossible
to
talk
about
growing,
an
economy
without
also
talking
about
sustaining
the
environment
within
which
that
economy
is
growing.
It
therefore
focuses
on
environmental
conservation
and
the
corporate
responsibilities
for
human
sustainability
and
how
these
things
are
critical
for
corporate
success.
A
A
It
found
that
these
three
elements
are
key
from
meeting
the
goals
of
sustainable
corporate
development,
poverty
reduction,
wealth
distribution
and
gender
equality,
and
it
found
these
and
published
about
it
in
1987.
That's
how
long
ago
they
knew
about
these
things
and
how
they
were
critical
for
corporate
and
economical
growth.
A
Furthermore,
each
one
of
these
are
inseparable
from
the
others.
They
are
interlocking
crises.
Each
one
is
a
component
of
a
lot
of
the
larger
crisis.
So
as
a
company,
it
is
not
possible
to
focus
on
just
one
of
these,
to
focus
on
just
wealth,
to
redistribution
or
to
focus
on
just
gender
equality.
Each
one
of
these
three
elements
must
be
addressed
simultaneously
if
there
is
to
be
any
positive
effect,
none
of
them
are
optional.
A
A
A
So,
as
I
mentioned
before,
there
are
many
elements
to
corporate
sustainability
and
they
all
must
be
addressed
simultaneously.
You
cannot
ignore
any
of
them.
These
are
both
internal
to
your
company,
such
as
looking
at
your
natural
resource
usage.
Are
you
using
sustainable
energy?
Are
you
recycling?
You
know
that
sort
of
good
stuff.
Does
your
company
have
a
diversity
and
inclusion
program?
Is
it
trying
to
bring
in
people
who
don't
look
exactly
alike,
people
who,
don't
think
exactly
alike?
A
Does
it
treat
its
employees
fairly?
This
is
these
are
all
things
that
happen
internally
to
your
company,
but
there
are
also
external
things
that
your
company
must
do
for
a
corporate
sustainability
plan.
It
must
look
at
its
entire
supply
chain.
Are
the
people
who
are
providing
your
services
who
are
providing
your
materials?
Are
they
also
acting
sustainably
because
they
are
not,
then
neither
is
your
company
and
then
the
overall
impact
your
company
has
on
the
environment
and
on
the
inhabitants
of
the
earth.
A
Now,
if
you
look
at
this
list,
what
you
will
notice
is
that
none
of
these
involve
simply
paying
money.
They
all
involve
a
lot
of
work,
a
lot
of
communication.
It's
not
just
throwing
money
at
the
problem,
as
you
can
probably
imagine
coming
up
with
all
of
these
things
and
implementing
a
plan
that
covers
all
of
those
elements
of
corporate
sustainability.
It
takes
a
lot
of
effort
and
it
takes
a
lot
of
time.
So
why
do
companies
do
it?
Why
would
they
invest
so
much
in
a
corporate
sustainability
plan?
A
Is
it
just
because
taking
care
of
the
earth
and
its
inhabitants
is
the
right
thing
to
do?
Well,
I
mean
yes,
it
is,
but
that's
not
the
only
reason
it
turns
out
studies
show.
Corporate
sustainability
plans
are
very,
very
profitable.
If
you
are
able
to
implement
one
correctly,
then
your
company
will
make
more
money.
It's
not
just
good
for
the
planet.
It's
good
for
your
stockholders
as
well,
and
here
are
some
of
the
benefits
that
companies
with
strong
corporate
sustainability
plans
find
from
implementing
them.
A
You
do
have
a
more
reliable
supply
chain
because
it
is
no
longer
reacting
to
the
environment
in
a
negative
way.
You
get
increased
collaboration
within
your
company
because
you
are
treating
people
better
and
you
have
a
better
culture
but
also
externally,
and
that
improved
communication
leads
to
more
innovation
which
allows
your
company
to
out-innovate
its
competitors.
You
also
have
happier
employees
so
they
stay
longer
and
it
is
less
expensive
to
hire
because
people
want
to
join
your
company.
You
have
a
very
good
reputation.
A
A
Well,
rather
than
reinventing
the
wheel,
an
approaching
the
subject
of
sustainability
from
scratch,
free
and
open-source
software
should
follow
the
open-source
way,
as
all
open-source
projects
do,
and
it
should
build
upon
the
work
contributed
by
others.
In
this
case,
it
can
build
upon
the
work
of
the
corporate
sustainability
planning
movement
and
the
Brundtland
report,
which
came
out
in
1987
and
most
people
and
software
don't
know
about
it.
A
Now,
as
with
corporate
sustainability,
open-source
sustainability
requires
a
focus
on
much
much
more
than
simply
money.
I
am
all
for
paying
maintain,
errs
absolutely,
but
paying
them
alone.
Just
doing
that
is
not
going
to
provide
the
support
that
free
and
open-source
software
needs
for
a
long
life
and
for
continued
success
and
just
with
corporate
sustainability.
There
are
these
interlocking
crises.
Each
one
of
them
is
a
component
of
the
overall
upon
source
sustainability
crisis,
and
just
as
with
corporate
sustainability,
you
cannot
focus
on
just
one
of
them,
for
instance,
money
and
expect
things
to
just
work.
A
So
here
are
those
interlocking
crises.
Here
are
the
elements
of
open
source
sustainability,
contributing
back
human
and
environmental
diversity
and
community
safety.
All
of
these
must
be
addressed
simultaneously.
They
are
intertwined,
they
are
braided
together,
they
are
not
separable,
they
must
be
addressed
by
all
people
and
all
organizations
that
want
to
work
toward
a
more
sustainable,
free
and
open-source
software
environment.
So
I
will
go
through
these
in
more
detail,
starting.
A
With
contributing
back
to
the
projects
on
which
your
company
relies
companies
that
use
free
and
open-source
software,
but
don't
contribute
back
or
support
the
projects
that
they
use,
those
companies
undermine
and
degrade
the
long
life
and
success
of
free
and
open
source
software.
So
your
companies
should
give
back
to
these
projects.
But
what
does
giving
back
look
like?
Well,
it
depends
on
what
the
project
needs.
It
could
be
money,
but
odds
are
very
good.
A
That's
not
the
case
and,
more
importantly,
a
lot
of
free
and
open
source
software
projects
are
not
set
up
to
accept
money
that
requires
infrastructure
that
they
do
not
have.
So,
if
you
simply
want
to
throw
money
at
the
problem,
the
project
won't
be
able
to
spend
it.
So
you
have
to
do
research
into
the
project
to
see
what
it
actually
needs.
A
Does
it
need
contributions
for
code
for
marketing,
for
testing
for
infrastructure,
for
events,
there
are
so
many
different
ways
to
contribute
to
open
source
software.
That
is
not
simply
throwing
money
at
the
problem
now,
I
have
managed
maintainer,
zuv,
vital
pieces
of
free
and
soft
free
and
open
source
software
infrastructure.
They
I
used
to
lead
software
engineering
departments.
A
Now
I
am
director
of
open
source
strategy
for
Juniper
Networks,
so
I,
don't
lead
teams
anymore,
I
lead
the
corporation,
but
when
I
did
lead
teams,
I
managed
people
who
were
working
on
critical
pieces
of
open
source
infrastructure.
The
company
we
worked
for
paid
them
full
time
to
work
on
this
open
source
infrastructure.
That's
all
they
did
was
work
on
open
source
because
they
reported
to
me
I
know
exactly
how
much
money
they
made.
I
also
know
how
much
time
they
were
spending
on
these
open
source
projects.
A
A
A
There
is
a
growing
body
of
research
that
shows
that
diverse
teams
consistently
outperform
teams
that
are
all
made
up
of
the
same
type
of
people
in
software.
That
typically
means
all
men
and
all
men
from
a
certain
background,
but
if
you
add
people
from
other
backgrounds,
if
you
add
people
from
other
races
other
genders,
what
research
shows
is
that
team
does
better
every
single
time.
A
Diversity,
though,
does
not
simply
mean
gender
or
race
or
background.
It
also
means
Geographic
and
language
diversity,
which
is
something
that
we
are
experiencing
here,
because
I
do
not
speak
a
single
word
of
Chinese,
and
many
of
you
do
not
speak
a
single
word
of
English,
but
we
are
all
interested
and
free
and
open-source
software.
A
This
is
a
global
experience
is
used
all
over
of
the
world
the
world,
but
most
projects
are
only
available
in
a
single
language,
the
language
of
the
primary
maintainer,
and
that
usually
is
English,
but
not
always
so.
Participation
and
contribution
from
people
in
other
countries
helps
to
open
the
door
to
the
people,
other
people
in
that
countries,
and
that
can
lead
to
millions
more
people
who
are
able
to
use
and
contribute
to
free
and
open-source
software.
A
A
But
there's
also
more
than
simply
the
human
side
of
open-source
for
diversity.
A
lot
of
companies
go
out
of
their
way
to
use
free
and
open-source
software
because
it
means
they
do
not
get
vendor
lock-in,
which
means
that
you
get
software
from
a
vendor
and
then
you
cannot
leave
that
vendor
ever.
But
if
you
use
an
open
source
solution,
you
can
go
and
use
another
vendor
from
that
open
source
solution,
it's
very
good
for
business,
but
what
we
are
seeing
more
and
more
of
is
open
in
open
source.
Software
is
a
type
of
vendor
lock-in.
A
We
are
seeing
monoculture
where
free
and
open
source
software
is
becoming
consolidated
and
very
small
number
of
organizations,
a
small
number
of
tools,
and
that
makes
these
organizations
and
tools
single
points
of
failure.
So
if
something
happens,
for
instance,
for
github
a
lot
of
open
source
software
development
screeches
to
a
halt
that
is
not
healthy
for
open
source,
I
love,
github,
I
use
it
myself.
A
I
want
it
to
be
very
successful
and
I
want
it
to
have
a
lot
of
competitors
who
are
also
supporting
open
source
software,
because
this
is
more
healthy
for
open
source
and
for
me,
as
someone
who
directs
a
company
to
use
open
source,
it
is
very
good
for
my
company
to
know
that
the
open
source
we
rely
on
can
be
available
from
multiple
places.
Not
simply
one.
A
So
the
third
element
of
open
source
sustainability
is
community
safety.
It
is
not
possible
to
build
a
diverse
contributor
base
where
people
do
not
feel
safe
as
an
open
source
participant.
Your
company
is
in
the
position
to
witness
unprofessional
and
unwelcoming
behavior
and
to
speak
out
against
it,
belittling
comments
personally
directed
criticisms,
sexualized
language
or
imagery
or
behaviors,
bigoted,
racist,
sexist
or
hateful
language.
A
A
Actions
such
as
these
undermine
the
trust
required
to
create
a
psychologically
safe
environment
that
is
necessary
for
a
thriving
open-source
project
and
community.
This
article
from
the
Harvard
Business
Review
talks
all
about
the
positive
business
effects
of
having
a
psychologically
safe
environment
if
you're
good
to
people,
if
you
treat
them
well
and
make
them
feel
safe,
your
company
thrives
and
makes
more
money.
A
So
one
way
your
company
can
help
to
ensure
community
safety
is
to
restrict
its
contributions
only
to
those
projects
that
both
have
a
code
of
conduct
and
empathetically
enforce
it.
This
is
an
example
of
a
code
of
conduct.
This
is
the
contributor
covenant.
It
is
used
by
many
many
free
and
open
source
software
projects,
and
it
is
a
very
good
example
of
a
code
of
conduct
having
a
code
of
conduct
in
your
repository
is
one
thing:
that's
just
having
a
file
in
your
repo
right,
but
enforcing
it
is
what
really
matters
and
not
enforcing
it.
A
What
will
your
company
do
to
work
on
them?
How
can
your
company
help?
What
is
your
company's
open-source
sustainability
plan
going
to
look
like
it
depends?
There
is
no
one
right
way
to
do
it,
and
that
is
because
every
company
has
unique
needs.
Every
company
has
different
free
and
open-source
software
projects
that
are
strategically
important
to
it,
and
each
of
those
projects
have
their
own
unique
needs
that
will
allow
them
to
be
successful
and
have
a
long
life.
A
So
to
get
started,
we
do
have
some
steps
here:
figure
out
what
projects
are
strategically
important,
talk
to
the
projects
to
see
what
they
need
and
then
give
it
to
them.
Now
that
seems
relatively
simple,
but
each
one
of
these
is
actually
very
involved
and
takes
a
lot
of
time
and
effort.
I
will
go
into
them
very
briefly,
first
figure
out
which
projects
are
important
to
your
company.
If
you're
going
to
have
an
open
source
sustainability
plan,
you
can't
simply
support
every
single
open
source
project
that
your
company
uses
it.
A
Just
it's
too
much
I
can
guarantee
you
are
probably
using
hundreds
or
thousands
of
projects,
and
you
don't.
You
can't
do
that.
It
does
not
scale,
as
we
say
in
software,
so
take
the
time
to
understand
your
open
source
software
supply
chain
which
links
in
that
chain
which
links
of
those
chain
which
open
source
projects
are
the
most
vital
to
your
your
company.
They
don't
have
to
be
very
large.
A
They
just
have
to
be
important
to
your
company
or
potentially
very
difficult
to
replace
the
things
that
your
software
that
runs
your
company,
simply
cannot
rely
without
next
talk
to
those
companies
projects
once
you've
identified
them,
go
to
the
community
and
learn
what
they
need
learn.
What
your
company
could
do
to
help
ensure
these
success
and
longevity
again,
that
could
be
many
different
things
could
be
testing
or
programming
or
documentation
or
administration,
or
project
management
or
design
or
infrastructure
or
security,
or
simply
yes,
paying
for
some
things.
A
Don't
force
support
on
them,
simply
because
it's
easy
for
you
do
what's
good
for
them
and
that
will
make
them
sustainable
and
have
a
long
life
and
third
actually
follow
through
once.
Your
company
has
determined
how
best
to
contribute
to
and
support
the
projects.
Then
you
start
implementing
a
plan,
but
as
with
a
corporate
sustainability
plan,
an
open-source
sustainability
plan
is
something
that
requires
a
lot
of
time.
A
lot
of
patience,
a
lot
of
commitment,
it
cannot
be
rushed.
You
cannot
take
shortcuts.
You
cannot
address
only
one
of
the
elements.
A
Your
plan
must
encompass
them
all.
Remember
you
are
trying
to
ensure
the
long
life
of
a
project.
That
means
you
must
take
the
long
view
as
well
and
invest
the
time
required
to
get
the
job
done
right.
It
also
means
your
company
cannot
simply
copy
the
plan
of
some
other
company.
Well,
we
shall
do
it
this
way
because
Google
does
it
that
way.
I
am
sorry
that
will
not
work,
because
your
company
is
unique.
Google
is
unique,
juniper
Networks
is
unique.