Lars Kurth Community Manger, Xen Project Chairman, Xen Project - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Lars Kurth Community Manger, Xen Project Chairman, Xen Project Advisory Board lars_kurth Director, Open Source, Citrix

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 Projected 150000 More than 1 Projects Million Today 100000 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 Effect this had Fixes that were applied (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 & Release 1 st KVM Management release Growth potential Canonical drops was limited early Xen Technical RedHat drops Coordination Team Xen in RHEL6 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 Intercommunity Friction – Not working with upstreams (branched kernel and QEMU) Introvert Community – Not working with distros (users are not “our” problem) Image Problem

Upstream QEMU complete Linux Host support for Xen Linux Guest support for Xen IBM, VMware, Red Hat and Citrix 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 the top of the funnel to make a Engage with Users 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 narrower Adopt Software 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 Ease of Use Distros Training Adopt Software Support Engage with Users Volunteer Programs Engage with Industry 2011 Community Programs Evangelize Platforms for Self Promotion Customize Contribute Collaboration Values Diversity Lead Governance Neutrality Business Opportunities

Extend Project Scope ARM + Mirage OS Follow Industry News Press Press Social Media Social Media Brand Brand Follow Project News Event Presence Event Presence Event Presence Communication Communication Communication Trial Software WebSite WebSite Documentation Documentation Getting Started Getting Started Distros Ease of Use Ease of Use Distros Training Adopt Software Support Engage with Users Volunteer Programs Volunteer Programs Engage with Industry NOW Community Programs Community Programs Evangelize Platforms for Self Promotion Customize Contribute Collaboration Collaboration Values Values Diversity Diversity Lead Governance Governance Neutrality Neutrality Business Opportunities Business Opportunities