

Ask HN: Do you contribute to open source projects with your real name? - chesney

What are the pros/cons of real name/pseudonymous/anonymous contributions?<p>Obviously there are lots of implications like privacy, taking credit, taking responsibility, claiming code, claiming copyrights,...<p>There was a similar discussion on Slashdot some time ago: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/08/11/17/1746239/Real-Name-For-Open-Source-Development<p>But that's Slashdot, this is Hackernews. What's your take?
======
bradfa
I do.

If you have to sign a copyright assignment statement, I'd think you'd be
required to by the project (such as for GNU projects). But even if you don't
assign your copyright to the project, I have a hard time understanding what
using a pseudonym would do for you.

If your employer owns anything you create (like most businesses in the USA),
then even if you submit under a pseudonym, once the employer finds out what
name(s) you're using, they still own the copyright. You just make it harder
and more annoying for them to find out that it's you.

I can understand if you're just writing a single bug report or sending a one-
off email to a mailing list asking a question, sure, using a pseudonym is
probably fine if you're worried about spam. But if you're actually
contributing to the project (code, documentation, specs, marketing, etc),
using your real name is the only way to go.

Also, if you put on your resume that you contribute to an open source project,
I'd go check that out. If I can't find your name anywhere, I'm going to assume
you're stretching the truth on your resume, probably in other places too.

~~~
slowpoke

      If your employer owns anything you create (like most businesses in the USA)
    

I'm not from the US, so excuse me if I ask you: What the hell?

Is this really true? _Anything_? Or just things related to your job? The
former would be - lacking any better word for it - ridiculous.

~~~
jkeel
There are limitations but frankly the line isn't clear as I would like it to
be. My last job said anything I create using the tools provided to my (my
laptop) could be subject to their ownership. My newest company goes a step
further and says anything I create in my spare time becomes theirs. Their
actual statement was, "Let's say you create the next facebook. Then that's our
property." Of course after explaining to them that I was "helping" a friend
build a specific web site they said that wouldn't be included as it is in
another business sector than they function in. The odd thing is that facebook
is not in their sector either. So again, my main complaint is that the line
isn't as clear as I'd like it to be for my tastes.

------
pseudonym
As a personal preference, I like to keep various site's pseudonyms separate
from my real life identity, inasmuch as is possible. I prefer to let each
identity gain or lose recognition in a vacuum, as it were, with no simple way
to simply google a username and get my full bio.

My take on it is that it's a lot easier to link them up as you need to, than
it is to unlink them.

~~~
ja27
Yes. After Dejanews resurrected ancient Usenet postings, I stopped using my
real name online for most things. But my flaw was using a single pseudonym
almost everywhere. So now my insightful Slashdot comments (that was years ago)
are by the same userid that posts stupid photoshops on Fark. I can't "claim"
my existing identity on one site without claiming all of them. So a few years
ago I moved to site-specific ("unlinked") IDs. If I someday wanted to stick my
real name on my HN profile, it would be easy and it isn't linked to other
sites. I've also gone to indistinct userids (ja27) that are almost impossible
to Google. (Just as I say that, I see that my HN profile is now the top result
for my id. Nothing else appears though.)

But back to the original question. I rarely contribute to open source, mostly
due to time issues, but when I do it's always as a pseudonym. My current
company may be ok with some open source project contributions but having been
acquired twice in 5 years (and always considering changing companies) I don't
want to take the chance that a new boss would change that. I also wouldn't
want to make it easy for a patent dispute to spill over between my paid closed
source work and open source.

~~~
sdguero
Like you, I have switched to using different user names for every site for
which I register, and I've done so for the same reasons. However, I've taken
things a step further by choosing user names that I find on other sites. If
someone googles for the user name, results at many sites might come up but
that doesn't mean we are the same people.

------
mmahemoff
How does this affect the consumer of open source? People are going to take
notice if Linus releases a version control system for example, versus
hipsterluldawg1981's newest thing on GitHub. Contributors are a signal of both
quality and longer-term commitment to the project.

An anonymous contributor with a good reputation would also be acceptable in
many cases, though it could be a red flag in large companies.

Never occurred to me how many people don't use real name. This must vary a lot
by community, because afaict most JavaScript open source seems is real name,
or just a well-known psudonym.

------
warp
In commit messages I use my nick (warp) followed by my e-mail address. The
email address is at my own domain, which has my full details (real name,
address, phone number) and resume, etc..

Writing code is what I do, and if other coders (or clients/employers) want to
contact me based on work of me they've seen, I want that to be easy for them.

However, because my real name and nick is so easily associated with my home
address and such, I never use my real name on social network sites. I don't
want a technology savvy thief to break into my home because I've been sharing
holiday photographs from some remote country and they know I will not be home.

In short: personal life == pseudonyms, professional life == real name.

------
mojahh
I do commit using my own name (well: a pseudonym/nickname followed by my real
name). I'm proud of what I contribute to open source and have no problem
whatsoever with people _knowing_ what I do. Even if there are embarassing
commits (such as fixing a terrible bug produced by yourself), it's still ment
to be public IHMO.

------
waffle_ss
I do, because it is instantly verifiable to prospective employers who want to
see things I've worked on. I don't think there is anything wrong with using a
pseudonym in this case, but doing so would make it at least one step more
difficult to verify that you actually wrote the code.

Also, it keeps me more honest. If every commit has my real name attached, I am
more likely to write clean code since I value my reputation.

------
nuclear_eclipse
I make all of my open source contributions using my real name and email
address, and I've been doing so for the past four years. This includes open
source work I was getting paid for as well as what I've done on my own free
time. It allows me to directly associate my work with my name for purposes of
improving my résumé without having to feel the need to "explain" my choice of
screen name. I've actually gotten so used to operating under my real name that
I feel a bit of regret on hacker news for having used my psuedonym here...

------
jensnockert
I didn't sign code with my real name for a long while, and it was great, it
feels honest. Doing work just to scratch your own itch, and in some cases I am
still doing it. For most projects, things like copyright and responsibility is
just things that get in the way, we just want things done, and the license
will never be enforced in court.

I started signing code when I started going to meetups etc, doing it with
people who actually knew me in real life, it started getting pointless to try
to hold a cloak of anonymity.

------
buro9
I don't.

I can't really remember my precise reasons why not but I recall having this
feeling that it was charity and that I don't go around stating which charities
I give money to because I feel that such things reveal some aspect of my
beliefs.

I'm probably quite raving about anonymity and the freedom to act without being
judged by it by future employers, government and the like.

So I vaguely concluded a long time ago that as software can reflect aspects of
political beliefs that such things are best done with anonymity.

These thoughts were a lot clearer a decade ago, now just out of habit I use
aliases. No-one ever seems to mind and at some level it feels cool to know
that you're not known.

I didn't make the mistake of using 1 alias everywhere, which is just as well
as a couple of times I've let slip my identity in IRC chat rooms.

Edit: I remember now... I had a particular gig which required government
clearance and during that process realised that everything I ever did was
going to be factored into their judgement and in the future it would be too.
It was then that I shifted all work that didn't need to be directly
attributable to aliases.

------
angelortega
I always use my real name, being in my own projects as well as contributing to
others'. Cannot imagine a reason not to do so.

------
jrussbowman
I do. I may use different email addresses sometimes in an effort to avoid
spam. But if I build something I want to put my name on it. It's been helpful
with letting people track me down to get help on things I've stopped work on a
long time ago, which then lets me help them get done what they need to get
done.

------
aniketpant
I use my name everywhere I can. Never had the need to not use it :)

After all, my work is me.

------
Pyrodogg
Generally just under a single pseudonym that is way too easily linked to my
real name. In my head they're almost synonymous on the internet.

------
briancurtin
I never got into the whole having a fake name or nickname on the internet
thing, so I use my real name everywhere. There are a few places I only use my
first name, but I'm not known as turbogeek42 or anything like that.

I've never cared much about the cons of using my name. What I say and what I
do is what I say and do. I'm not really worried about it.

------
sagarun
I do, It depends on your employer. Do you hate reputation? Do you want
privacy? Then use a pseudo name

