Linus Torvalds explains why aging Linux developers are a good thing

Linus Torvalds speaking at the Open Source Summit Europe, September 16, 2024

Image Credits: Open Source Summit Europe / Linus Torvalds (left) on stage with Dirk Hohndel

Linux’s luminary linchpin, Linus Torvalds, says that despite longstanding reports of burnout in the open source software development realm, Linux is as strong as ever — though he acknowledges his project is perhaps something of an outlier due to its scale and scope.

Speaking to Verizon’s head of open source Dirk Hohndel at the Linux Foundation’s Open Source Summit Europe in Vienna on Monday, Torvalds tackled a topic that has frequently reared its head in the Linux world and beyond: an aging developer community prone to burnout.

“It is absolutely true that [Linux] kernel maintainers are aging, but there is a positive spin on that,” Torvalds said. “How many [open source] projects have maintainers that have literally been around for over three decades? It is very unusual. So when people say, ‘developers burn out and go away’ — yes, that’s true, but that’s kind of normal. What is not normal is that people actually stay around for decades, that’s the unusual thing, and I think that’s to some degree a good sign.”

Historically, Linux was very much a C-centric kernel, but in 2022 the project introduced official support for Rust, a general-purpose, open-source programming language backed by many big-name technology companies. Just a few weeks back, Rust for Linux project lead Wedson Almeida Filho announced they were stepping down after almost four years, as they found themselves “lacking the energy and enthusiasm” to deal with some of the “non-technical nonsense” surrounding the project.

And back in January, senior Rust engineer Jynn Nelson also noted that the burnout problem is very real. “The number of people who have left the Rust project due to burnout is shockingly high,” Nelson wrote. “The number of people in the project who are close to burnout is also shockingly high.”

The trust factor

Linux is probably the most successful open-source project of all time, intersecting with everything from web servers and ATMs, to desktop and mobile operating systems. During these growth years, Torvalds has branched out and created the omnipresent version control system known as Git. But some 33 years on from Linux‘s inception, Torvalds remains the kernel’s central maintainer, with support from tens of thousands of contributors stemming from corporations reliant on Linux, as well as sources closer to home such as Linux Foundation fellow Greg Kroah-Kartman, who leads on the Linux kernel’s stable release.

“I think part of the issue with us having a lot of developers, is that we’ve always had a lot of people who are very competent and could step up,” Torvalds said. “Greg hasn’t always been Greg — before Greg, there were Andrews and Allens, and after Greg there will be Shannons and Steves. There are people who have been around for decades, and the real issue is that you have to have a person — or a group — that people in the development community can trust. And part of trust is fundamentally about having been around for ‘long enough’ that people know how you work.”

However, Torvalds acknowledged that such an ecosystem can be daunting and difficult for younger or less-experienced developers to enter, especially when they see incumbents that have been around so long. But despite that, there are newcomers who manage to make their way into the heart of the Linux project.

“We have core developers that are top-level maintainers for major subsystems, who have come up in just a few years,” Torvalds said. “It’s not instant, but there are new people who come in, and three years later they are a main developer. It is not impossible at all. I think we have a fairly healthy developer subsystem, but the whole monkey dance about developers, developers, developers… we’ve got them. The fact that we also have these old, ‘graying’ people around — I don’t see that as a huge problem.”

Jess Lee at TC Early Stage

Sequoia's Jess Lee explains how early-stage startups can identify product-market fit

Jess Lee at TC Early Stage

Image Credits: TechCrunch / Flickr (opens in a new window) under a CC BY 2.0 (opens in a new window) license.

Founders at the early stages of building their startups may have already created a strong solution, identified a gap in the market, or may simply have an inescapable and driving motivation to build their own business. Ideally, they have a good combination of all three. But do they have product-market fit? And what actually is product-market fit, anyway?

The investors at Sequoia, one of the world’s biggest venture capital firms, have come up with a very handy framework to answer those two questions. It distills the landscape into three archetypes.

“Hair on Fire” roughly means that your startup addresses an urgent problem. A security startup, for example, might fit here, especially if it can win initial business on the back of parachuting in to fix a breach or other problem already in progress. Or, think of the wave of companies that offered services to businesses and users when they were suddenly sheltering in place and working from home during the peak of COVID-19.

“Hard Fact” translates as a startup that solves an existing problem better than what’s already out there. Square, which emerged as a new point of sale product in a seemingly old and saturated market, is a good example of this.

Lastly, “Future Vision” relates to deep tech, moonshots and products out of left field. These would include quantum startups, but also those building flying cars or even autonomous vehicles that would ply our roads (or any of the tech that will be needed to make such vehicles).

Each of these archetypes will have its own customer mindset, competitive market status, opportunity/general product goals, challenges, examples of those who got it right and those that did not and so on. Sequoia partner Jess Lee, a specialist in early-stage investing, gave a big talk on the concept at TechCrunch’s Early Stage event in Boston in April. Sequoia has written about the framework here, too.

In sum, the theory goes like this: Startups all, more or less, fit into one of these three archetypes, so identifying which archetype a company fits in can help it focus and develop.

Sequoia is confident enough of the structure that it uses the framework in its Arc program to help early-stage founders focus on how they are building. It also helps the firm evaluate potential startup investments. Beyond that, and just as importantly, founders can lean on an archetype to better anticipate and articulate the challenges and opportunities in their space. That can be helpful for decision-making internally, of course, as well as for fundraising or pitching partnerships or customers.

During her presentation on the framework, Lee said that Sequoia does not have a favored category among the three.

“I think you can create great companies in all those categories,” Lee said. Still, she admitted that certain kinds of companies might find it especially challenging to raise money in the current climate.

For deep tech and moonshots — two common kinds of startups found in the “Future Vision” category — fundraising “was easier in a zero-interest-rate period when there was a ton of capital flowing in,” Lee said. “I don’t know if [those companies] would have been able to raise as much [starting out now] as they had to, to be able to get to where they are now.”

Lee was a co-founder at Polyvore, which combined social mechanics and e-commerce — its users contributed fashion and product clips from around the web and used those products to assemble mood boards, with affiliate marketing underpinning it all. Polyvore was eventually acquired by Yahoo, and she parted ways with it. Yet, that e-commerce and consumer focus has stayed with her, she said, adding that she’s still interested in trying to find new winners in that category despite the challenges of trying to break into the space these days.

“It can still be done,” she said. “I feel like many consumer companies fall in the ‘Hard Fact’ category, and I particularly love working with consumer companies. But you have to be good at both marketing your problem as well as marketing your solution and building this. So it takes a lot to get it right.

“It almost feels like alchemy. I can’t tell you how many founders I’ve met who said, ‘Oh, yeah I was working on Snapchat, too. Like, I had my own version.’ And it sounded like it was similar, but just the right number of details allowed Snapchat to be the one that broke away.”

None of this is to say that the third category, “Hair on Fire,” is exactly easy. “You have to ruthlessly execute,” Lee said. “[You need] so much velocity to stay ahead of everyone.”

Her conclusion drives home one of the most critical aspects of building an early-stage business. “I think there’s a little bit of founder-market fit that goes into each of these product-market fit categories.”