Fernando, the creator of Ipython and ultimately what morphed into Jupyter is missing from your list. That dude is an inspiration.

Sorry, Fernando as well as all the contributors are included in the "we, the Jupyter team". I did not start to mention individuals otherwise the list would be really long. I would encourage people to look at (at minimum) the steering council on Jupyter.org for a list of key people in the project.

We are also striving to make contributing to Jupyter / open source recognized in Academia - for people like Fernando to get proper recognition, and future generations of scientists to have incentives to do this kind of work.

>We are also striving to make contributing to Jupyter / open source recognized in Academia - for people like Fernando to get proper recognition, and future generations of scientists to have incentives to do this kind of work.

And thank you for this! Do you have a post about what efforts are going on? I myself am trying to find out how to navigate academic spaces while spending significant time doing open source development. I am curious how you're pushing for changed incentives to help people in this kind of position out.

Thank you for mentioning him, I didn't know of him. For anyone interested here is an interesting talk he gave recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuNj5paMuow

Thank you for all your hard work!!

Understanding what it took for Jupyter to be where it is, and how much work it took, who pushed for it, and how many people had to work to make it happen, this is important.

You're absolutely right to emphasize that it's not free to build. I worry that promoting a mentality like the author's that open source and free to use is honest, and for-profit is "dishonest" dramatically undervalues and undermines your work as well as the funding model. If we treat Jupyter like it's our right, and not a miracle of funding and hard work, we will make it more difficult for Jupyter to attract help and to succeed.

I can only imagine how many billions of dollars in company value have been generated using the product of their uncompensated labor.

Same goes for the rest of the data stack: Python itself, Numpy, Scipy, Scikit-Learn, Pandas, etc.

Fun fact, as far as the Jupyter team can tell, there are more full time Dev on Jupyter than CPython. Also pretty excited that bumpy recently got funding for 2 full time Dev that will work at UC BIDS!

It's not free. Grant money means someone's paid for it (us, taxes). Volunteer is about credit, not fiat, but still costs something (gpl restrictions).

Jupyter is great, it's revolutionized online education for example. But it's not as full featured as Mathematica, and like most Foss projects, slower to fix bugs, aka you get what you pay for. Both have a place unless you have hired, 100% dedicated help on juptyer. This is much like public radio vs corporate. Together they do the market needs.

Grant usually differ from US taxes. And AFAICT, Jupyter received no money from govt source.

Jupyter is not GPL but MIT, and volunteering is rarely about credit.

I'm pretty sure some of Fernando's early work on ipython was funded through his NSF grants.