I work on OpenStack, which is a project folks work on primarily due to sponsorship -- not many people who want to do security/stability work for a cloud "for the fun of it" :D.

So mentees I've worked with have usually come as part of a program, such as MLH[1] or Outreachy[2]. Other projects I've helped with mentoring have come from college programs or professors[3].

I have no idea how hard it is to get through the filters to get these opportunities; I know generally we ask them to only send us the best and that's worked out really well.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbsI8l-MaFA is an interview done on my podcast (by the other host, Tabatha) with CID, who works with me on OpenStack Ironic. A little over 2 years ago, he was an MLH fellow (https://fellowship.mlh.com/) working with me -- now he's a maintainer on OpenStack and working on my team. This is an exceptional outcome, but he's not the only person who has found success via MLH that I know.

[2] e.g. https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@...

[3] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@...

Debian itself is actually great: https://mentors.debian.net/sponsors/

https://stagex.tools

Always happy to train up new packagers and maintainers.

Usually, mentorship is a quite well paid service.

Good. I want open source projects which serve infrastructure to be gate kept so that only responsible people are involved. Responsible people can use AI too. Get all of those people on board, and keep out irresponsible people!

Most people who wrote software before AI didn’t contribute to projects like Debian because it takes a certain passion and commitment. Just being able to write code is not the bar for entrance here.

This isn't talking about bespoke software, though. This is talking about upstreaming contributions to others. This puts a low barrier to create work and a lot more work for unpaid volunteers.

I don't care if a project uses AI or not, but I absolutely do care that they are firmly gatekept in alignment with their vision and team dynamics. Then I can choose projects whose gatekeeping policies I agree with.

There is never not an alternative to something, and I can always have my AI botch together my own version if I think this is going to get me better results.

The issue at hand isn’t people using AI to make some app that they and their mom will use. That’s awesome.

It’s people who insist that potentially millions of other people should be affected by their vibe-coded stuff too, by upstreaming it into Debian.

I vibe coded some simple things for the family myself, but I don’t expect or require anyone else to want or use it.

> ngl this is just gatekeeping

As a beneficiary of Debian, this is good, you are praising Debian with feint damnation. I wish Debian had done more gatekeeping in the past on specific components.

Gatekeeping is good, actually. Not keeping your gate is how your town gets overrun by Mongols.

“This is just gatekeeping” is simultaneously true and ignoring the problem it’s reacting to.

Also there’s an implicit moral judgement there against gatekeeping.

Ah, "icky gatekeeping." I'm convinced.

> ngl this is just gatekeeping

Gatekeeping serves a useful purpose in any functioning organization of all scales, from a community center to a country, from an open source project to a Fortune 500.

There are no anonymous debian developers. All have been vetted by multiple people.

Why not? I'm pretty sure a developer could spam large PRs before and regardless of AI involvement is allowed or not.

the age is not the measure of quality. the GP said they left the posts/comments open. anybody can read that and check if they are or not a serious contributor