How to Start contributing to Open Source?

If you are active in any developer community, chances are you have come across the buzzword opensource. What is it all about, why should you be a part of the open-source movement and how to get started with contributing to Open Source projects! I’ve got it all covered for you in one place!

What is OpenSource?

Any software released under a license which the copyright holder grants users the right to use, study, change, and distribute the software and its source code to anyone for any purpose is called Open Source Software (OSS). OSS is usually developed in a collaborative public manner. Open source projects and initiatives make use of the principles of open exchange, collaborative participation, transparency, and community-oriented development.

The Open Source Software movement is a movement that supports the use of open-source licenses for software, a part of the broader notion of open collaboration. The movement was started to spread the concept/idea of open-source software. Developers who support the open source movement contribute to the open-source community by voluntarily writing and exchanging code for software development.

Today, OSS is the secret sauce that greases the internet’s wheels, with over 78% of the businesses being built on Open source software!

Why Should You Contribute?

Community

For most developers, contributing to open source is being part of the larger open source movement, a part of something much bigger than a single individual. It provides a sense of community and agency over one’s own life and the software that you use.

Upskilling

Whether it’s coding, design, or even writing, if you’re looking for a place to practice and upskill yourself, there’s a task for you on an open source project!

Build a Portfolio

Contributing to open source projects can also be an interesting addition to your work portfolio, which you can use as samples of your work available in the public domain.

Network

Alongside all the above-mentioned reasons, the OSS community is also the best place to network with like-minded people from the tech community. Many people find mentors, collaborators and teachers, who are all interested in the community’s wellbeing.

Ready to Contribute?

Myth: You need to write code to Contribute!

This is a myth that I often encounter in my circle of friends, which is absolutely baseless. Open source is much more than just code. Successful open source projects include code, usability, community and documentation together. Without documentation, your code is useless as it cannot be used to its full potential. Additionally, while making your first contribution is surely scary, making a non-code contribution can ease your way into the OSS community. Additionally, the process of collaboration will build your confidence and experience.

Other ways you can Contribute:

• Writing Documentation

• Organising Events Around Open Source Projects

• Improving Design, Layout, UI/UX of the project

• Support Queries - Answering questions and FAQs around using the project on forums like StackExchange.

Warming Up to Get Started

Every Open Source project has the following type of People:

1. Author: The person/s or organization that created the project.

2. Maintainers: Contributors who are responsible for managing the project.

3. Contributors: Everyone who has contributed something to the project; be it code, design or even documentation.

4. Community: People who use the project for various purposes.

Before we dive into how to get started, let’s get ourselves equipped with some basic open-source terminologies:

Git

In open source projects, many developers work on a single project. In this case, there is one original file that each developer has a copy of and is working on. This is where Git comes in and simplifies the process.

In Git, each change in any file is tracked down and this can be easily pushed to the original file. This avoids any sort of issue where everyone edits the original file without knowing each other’s code.

“Git is a free and open-source distributed version control system designed to handle everything from small to very large projects with speed and efficiency.”

Additionally, it becomes easy to go back to the previous code if there is a bug in the new code and making it compatible with the previous code again.

GitHub

Git provides control over the source code, and GitHub is a platform that uses git version control to upload open source projects to their cloud for sharing code with others. Git is local while GitHub is cloud-based, allowing developers to easily work together on projects.

Issue tracker

Issue Tracker is a  way to keep track of tasks, enhancements, and bugs for your projects. They can be shared and discussed with the rest of your team.

Pull requests

Pull request is created for the change in code or documentation that is ready to merge into the original code after approval by the maintainer of the repository. Such changes can be discussed and reviews before merging into the repository.

README

README is an instruction manual that welcomes members to the project. It should clearly explain why the project is useful and how to get started with using the project.

Code of Conduct

A code of conduct is a document that establishes expectations for social behaviour from all of your project’s participants. A code of conduct can help create a positive atmosphere for your community and may help distance yourself from avoidable conflicts.

Contributing Docs

Contributing docs assist people in contributing to the project. It explains how to contribute and what sort of contributions are required.

Not every project has a Contributing file.

Finding a Project!

Now that you have all the background information you need to get started, you need to find an open-source project to get started on. **

The best way to find a project to start working on is to start contributing on a project you already use or find interesting. For such projects, you’ve probably already had thoughts crossing your mind like, “what if this was better?” or “I wish someone would fix this bug!”.

You might read through the documentation and find an issue that you think should really be in the documentation. Instead of tip-toeing around it, or asking someone else to fix it, make it your chance to step in. That’s what open source is all about! This is the best place to start your first open-source contribution.

Additionally, every open source project has a /contribute page that shows issues you can start out with. Navigate to the main page of the repository on GitHub, and then add /contribute at the end of the URL.

https://github.com/typesense/typesense/contribute

Getting started

Now that you have found your repository of choice as well as a contribution to make to it, it’s time to submit your contribution to the project.

Note: Before doing anything, make sure your idea hasn’t been discussed elsewhere. Go through the project’s README, and issues in detail. If you can’t find your idea elsewhere, proceed with it.

Before you can open an issue or pull request, you need to check the project’s contributing docs, to see whether you need to include anything specific. Some projects may need you to follow a specific template while raising a pull request or issue.

Opening a Pull Request

As mentioned above, a pull request is used to make changes in code or documentation.

It is better to open a pull request early on, so others can give you feedback on your progress. Especially so if the changes are not trivial.

Step 1: Fork the repo by Pressing Fork in the top right corner of your Github window.

Step 2: Next, clone the repo by opening the terminal on your computer using the below code. Use your GitHub username instead of <YourUserName>

git clone https://github.com/<YourUserName>/typesense

Step 3: Change to the repository directory on your computer. Then create a new branch and create a new remote for the upstream repo.

In this case, "upstream repo" refers to the original repo you created your fork from.

cd Typesense

git checkout -b new_branch

git remote add upstream https://github.com/<YourUsername>/chatwoot

Step 4: Make changes to the code. Add those changes to the branch you just created using the git add command:

git add

git commit -m "your_commit_message"

Step 5: Push your changes using the command:

git push origin <branch-name-that-you-created>

Step 6: Once you push the changes to your repo, the “Compare & pull request” button will appear on GitHub. Clicking on it will lead you to a window where you can create a pull request. This allows the repo's maintainers to review your contribution. From here, they can merge it if it is good, or they may ask you to make some changes.

It is always better to provide clear understanding of your request in the pull request title and comments so that the maintainer can understand what you've worked on.

🥳Congratulations, you are now an open-source contributor!

Post-Submission

Once you submitted your submission, one of many things may happen!

1. Your contribution is accepted!

Good for you if this happens! Your Contribution is officially accepted.

1. Your contribution is rejected

Don’t be disheartened, this is not a failure. In this case, you can ask the maintainer for feedback and clarification to make use of in the future.

1. Someone requests a change to your contribution

This could be feedback on the scope of your idea or changes to your code. Respect the time and energy that they’ve taken to review your contribution. Opening a Pull Request and walking away is not respectable. If you don’t know how to make changes, feel free to ask for help if you need it.

I hope this has motivated you to make your very first open-source contribution! Welcome to the OSS Community! We hope this is one of the many more great contributions you are about to make to the community.

To find the original version of this article published on Aviyel, Click here

Women in Finance: Hurdles in Climbing the Corporate Ladder

By Prachi Jain & Charu Veluthoor

Women are majorly under-represented in the financial sector. Despite an increase in women graduating from business schools and other related financial degrees programs, the numbers do not look promising in the c-suite level of the workplace. While women are almost equally represented at entry-level positions in this industry, the numbers drop sharply at the executive level. The under-representation of women in the financial sector has been recognized to be a result of multiple underlying factors ranging from structural elements at the workplace like gender biases to societal expectations and familial responsibilities. Through this paper, we attempt to study these underlying factors and consequently suggest policy implications to improve the representation of women in finance. As we discuss in our paper, some of these factors are either unique or more pertinent to the sector. This paper explores two things: first, the individual and familial choices of women in response to factors that are specific to the financial sector that force women to drop out of the industry and secondly, the structural problems women face within the sector that prevent them from reaching c-suite level positions. In the end, we suggest policy measures that can help increase the number of women in this sector and the limitations of the current research in this domain. 

Individual and Family Choices

Most recent literature attributes the high dropout rate of women between entry-level to c-suite level jobs to more individual choices that women make due to the nature of the financial sector. With its long working hours, the sector does not seem to be the choice of industry for folks who prioritize their work-life balance, and is particularly true for mothers. Data from the Pew Research Center (2020) shows that mothers are more likely to quit a job, work fewer hours, or take significant time off of work than fathers in the US. One of the primary reasons for this is that women adjust their careers for their families. This may be because traditional gender roles assigned to women and the gender wage gap make the opportunity costs of the man not working higher. Studies show a strongly gendered labor response to parenthood: women dramatically decrease their employment and work fewer hours if employed, whereas men’s employment and hours worked barely change (Sin, 2018). Among women in senior-level positions, a study from McKinsey & Company (2018) found the inability to balance family and work is cited by half of the senior-level women as a significant reason for not wanting to pursue top executive roles. This finding is perhaps not surprising, given that as women’s responsibilities at work increase with seniority in the financial sector, they are seen to maintain their responsibilities at home. Nearly half of senior-level women say they continue to shoulder most household responsibilities, while just 13 percent of their male peers say the same. 

Literature suggests that these effects are exemplified in careers with non-linear wage structures, such as finance and consulting. Such compensation includes performance-based pay, bonus systems based on defined metrics, and pay based on subjective performance which often exhibit non-linear characteristics. Non-linear wage structures prevalent in the financial services industry are seen as not attractive to mothers, who have a strong preference for flexible work hours. Therefore, mothers are willing to trade lower pay for more flexible work hours, according to Bütikofer et al (2018), and leave their high-paying financial sector jobs for other sectors. In particular, Bütikofer et al suggest that women in more non-linear wage structures—like finance—suffer from a more persistent child wage penalty than women in professions with a more linear wage structure—STEM and medicine.  

Additionally, since financial sector jobs are mostly located in big cities, promotions often require relocation. Turning down an opportunity to avoid relocating one’s family seems to be another hurdle. Women are more likely than men to have geographical limits on their careers (Markham 1987; Steil and Weltman 1991). Studies show that over 34% of women in finance reported geographical restrictions in their jobs in finance (Blair-Loy, 1999).

Structural Challenges

Various structural problems at the workplace contribute to the low number of women at the executive level. Women frequently encounter what is commonly referred to as the glass ceiling. The Glass Ceiling Commission, 2003 defined the glass ceiling as the “artificial barriers that prevent qualified individuals from advancing within their organization and reaching full potential” (Akpinar-Sposito, 2013). These barriers can take many forms—the most important is the problem of gender wage gaps: women are paid significantly less than men for the same work at the same position. Akpinar-Sposito (2013) talks about the lack of mentoring and training programs for women and other underrepresented minorities. Women managers also tend to be evaluated less favourably, receive less support from their peers, are excluded from essential networks, and receive greater scrutiny and criticism even when performing the same leadership roles as men (Sabharwal, 2013). Leadership positions have traditionally been associated with men—it is tough for women to break that mindset. One of the most important reasons why all these barriers are more prevalent in the financial sector is because the sector is perceived to be more masculine in nature (Meeks, 2014). Young women who pursue finance in college report seeing their male peers bond with internship interviewers on masculine topics like fantasy football. In classes, they report being taught about men like Warren Buffett and Benjamin Graham (Meeks, 2014). Many women who infact are successful in the field attribute their success to their comfort in this masculine environment. This thinking can pressure women to assimilate to the masculine culture to advance in the field, and this might create a barrier for women who don’t want to mask their femininity in order to succeed (Meeks, 2014). 

Policy Implications

Some policy measures that the finance industry can take to mitigate the problem are as follows: first, the industry needs to rebrand itself and demonstrate that it is a sector in which women can thrive. Doing so will help improve female representation at the earlier stages of the career funnel and is particularly important in subsectors, such as asset management and wholesale banking, where women start out below parity (Chin et al., 2018). A rebranding of financial services will require its leaders to commit to change, not only by taking action to make their own companies places where women can thrive but also by voicing their commitment to the industry. Second, there is a need to increase access to sponsorship. Sponsorship matters to women at all career stages. It is even more important in this sector because in financial services, senior-level women are more likely than their entry-level peers and senior-level women in other industries to say that sponsorship played an important role in their careers (Chin et al., 2018). Financial services companies can expand offerings for formal sponsorship programs. At present, only 58 percent have such programs (Chin et al., 2018). These should be designed specifically to address the challenges that hinder entry-level women from advancement into the senior ranks. Also, while female role models are crucial, both men and women should serve as sponsors and mentors to ensure that women build the diverse networks they need in their careers. 

Third, companies should try to eliminate bias in reviews and promotions which will boost the lagging promotion rate for entry-level women and help alleviate senior-level women’s sense that their gender has hindered their advancement (Chin et al., 2018). It is therefore especially important for the financial services industry to address the biases—often unconscious—that are holding back female talent. Fourth, the sector needs to give women the flexibility to balance work & family. Although flexibility programs are actually common across the financial sector with, currently, nearly 90 percent of financial-services companies offering extended maternity and/or paternity leave, and 92 percent offering flexible work policies, women—especially senior-level women—fear that partaking in flexibility programs might hinder their advancement (Chin et al., 2018). Companies must encourage leaders of both genders to signal their acceptance and usage of these flexible working policies. Additionally, companies should foster open dialogues about how policies could be enhanced to meet employees’ and their families' needs better. 

Limitations and the Way Ahead

We realize that there are numerous reasons why women do not climb the corporate ladder in the financial sector. The root cause of women dropping out of the industry is most likely a combination of various factors we have discussed. However, there are intersectionalities that we have missed out on—women belonging to minority groups when it comes to race, ethnicity, region, and disability most likely witness a multitude of further challenges in the sector. We see that marginalized groups are further underrepresented in the industry. Though many of the structural and familial factors affect women from these groups alike, there may be other layers of hurdles posed to them. 

To mitigate the underrepresentation of women in senior-level positions in finance, diversity needs to become a universal objective. Eliminating the structural hurdles of climbing the corporate ladder within the financial sector is critical for the sector’s success in the long run, with the customer base growing to include more and more women, everyday. Companies in the sector need to change their composition to attract and retain their clients’ wealth better. Thus, the need to increase women’s participation in the sector is essential from both a societal and an economic standpoint. 

References

Akpinar-Sposito, C. (2013). Career barriers for women executives and the Glass Ceiling Syndrome: The case study comparison between French and Turkish women executives. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75, 488–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.04.053 

Blair‐Loy, Mary. “Career Patterns of Executive Women in Finance: An Optimal Matching Analysis.” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 104, no. 5, 1999, pp. 1346–1397., https://doi.org/10.1086/210177. 

​​Brock N. “Glass Ceiling in Financial Services Proves Tough to Shatter.” BrinkNews, 4 Dec. 2014, https://www.brinknews.com/glass-ceiling-in-financial-services-proves-tough-to-shatter/

Bütikofer, Aline, et al. “The Role of Parenthood on the Gender Gap among Top Earners.” European Economic Review, vol. 109, 2018, pp. 103–123., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2018.05.008. 

Chin, Stacey, et al. “Closing the Gap: Leadership Perspectives on Promoting Women in Financial Services.” McKinsey & Company, McKinsey & Company, 12 Apr. 2022, https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/financial-services/our-insights/closing-the-gap-leadership-perspectives-on-promoting-women-in-financial-services. 

Markham, William T., and Joseph H. Pleck. “Sex and Willingness to Move for Occupational Advancement: Some National Sample Results.” The Sociological Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 1, 1986, pp. 121–43, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4106169. Accessed 25 Apr. 2022.

Parker, Kim. “Women More than Men Adjust Their Careers for Family Life.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 14 Aug. 2020, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/01/women-more-than-men-adjust-their-careers-for-family-life/. 

Sabharwal, M. (2013). From glass ceiling to Glass Cliff: Women in senior executive service. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(2), 399–426. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mut030 

Sin, Isabelle, and Gail Pacheco. “How Parenthood Continues to Cost Women More than Men.” The Conversation, 21 Apr. 2022, https://theconversation.com/how-parenthood-continues-to-cost-women-more-than-men-97243. 

Steil, Janice M., and Karen Weltman. 1991. “Marital Inequality: The Importance of Resources, Personal Attributes, and Social Norms on Career Valuing and the Allocation of Domestic Responsibilities.” Sex Roles 24:161–79.

Potential positive consequences of international migration for the development of the domestic economy

Potential concerns with International migration

Widespread international migration of high-skilled labor from the domestic economy to foreign countries is a concern for any nation. The fiscal cost of such migration may be specifically high, particularly so if higher education is subsidized in the nation using taxpayer's money, and those benefitting from such subsidies do not contribute back to the tax system of the nation (Bhagwati and Hamada, 1974). Additionally, the widespread migration of high-skilled labor in the form of professionals such as doctors and academics, deprives the domestic economy of essential services such as healthcare and education, due to a shortage of skilled labor within the country. 

Why International Migration can be a boon in disguise for Developing Economies

As international migration of skilled labor increases, education levels in the domestic economy are also seen to rise. Defoort (2008) finds that the education level of the home workforce increases at a rate similar to that of tertiary-educated migrants from the country, essentially implying over time that the migration is substituted with domestic skilled labor over time. This would mean that in the long run, not all those who choose to increase their education because of the chance they may migrate, actually end up migrating. Hence, providing more opportunities to skilled professionals from the domestic economy to work abroad might not deplete supplies of medical workers at home, but could raise them by increasing the incentives for people in the domestic economy to gain skills and education. Additionally, for nations like India, international migration has had great positive implications for the nation, resulting in the reverse flow in income, investment and expertise from the global Indian diaspora. 

International Migration: A Boon or Bane? 

International migration is a complex policy question that makes any economist or policy-maker think twice. According to Theories of International trade, two nations with unequal resource endowments can enjoy a bilateral increase in economic well-being by freely exchanging capital, goods, and labor (Martin and Richards, 1980). Permitting free exchange, therefore, increases the output available to both nations. However, theory differs from practice in the distinction that countries place greater concern on the welfare of their own citizens, while theory treats the welfare of all equally. International migration benefits migrants and their employers but may force citizens of the foreign country to compete with migrants for jobs, housing, and public goods. Therefore, even if total output in both nations increases, migration is mutually beneficial only if its effects on each country's income distribution are relatively small. Hence, there is no right or wrong answer to the question if international migration is a boon or a bane.