After publishing my recent article defending coding tests, I read a post by James Mahy, a genuinely kind, and exceptionally talented developer whom I ironically had the good fortune to interview some years ago. In it, he raises some interesting points, suggesting that GitHub contributions do not always reflect motivation, skill, or tenacity, and may even be misleading. My own experience leads me to a different conclusion.

I have been contributing to open source for almost two decades. It has taught me a great deal about real-world problem-solving, communication, and collaboration. Furthermore, reviewing a candidate’s contributions - whether personal projects, pull requests, or issues, can reveal insights into their creativity, communication skills, and technical mindset. This applies equally to junior developers because even small projects or issues can demonstrate qualities like passion, curiosity, intelligence, diligence, empathy, humility, and respect.

That said, I agree with James that open source contributions should not be a requirement. Plenty of excellent developers do not engage in open source for various reasons. But if someone has made meaningful contributions, I want to hear about them. For me, it is less about the green squares and more about the stories behind them; what interests they have, what challenges they faced, and what they learned along the way.

Open source is just one piece of the puzzle, but it is often a fascinating one. I believe it can be a valuable part of the hiring conversation, no matter what the candidate’s level of experience.