I think the reason that most community.o issues don't get a lot of active contribution, despite good will from the llvm community in general, is that most contributors are either students or paid employees. As such, they have to "dance with the ones that brought them," and so community contribution would need to take up mostly personal time. It isn't fair to ask folks to work on community stuff with their personal time.
Some video games rely on strong community interaction, and the games industry has developed a skillset for community managers. These folks are critical for the success of online games, and are paid employees who keep busy managing their online communities. I'm not certain if there's a similar set of paid professionals with experience in open source, but I think the Foundation would have the most success on advancing community issues by having a person who is accountable for advancing the work.
From our community.o workshop discussion:
I think the reason that most community.o issues don't get a lot of active contribution, despite good will from the llvm community in general, is that most contributors are either students or paid employees. As such, they have to "dance with the ones that brought them," and so community contribution would need to take up mostly personal time. It isn't fair to ask folks to work on community stuff with their personal time.
Some video games rely on strong community interaction, and the games industry has developed a skillset for community managers. These folks are critical for the success of online games, and are paid employees who keep busy managing their online communities. I'm not certain if there's a similar set of paid professionals with experience in open source, but I think the Foundation would have the most success on advancing community issues by having a person who is accountable for advancing the work.