What kind of support do you find new developers in Bitcoin are most in need of?
Most new Bitcoin developers don’t primarily need more tutorials or more documentation. They need context, feedback, and continuity.
The hardest part is not writing code, but learning how Bitcoin development actually works: how to read a large and old codebase, how to scope changes that are realistic, how to communicate in issues and PRs, and how to receive review without getting discouraged. That knowledge is mostly implicit and rarely written down.
Early, high-quality feedback is critical. Many new contributors get stuck working in isolation for weeks, unsure if they’re heading in the right direction. A small course correction early on can save enormous amounts of time and frustration, but that requires experienced reviewers who are willing to engage before things are “perfect.”
Continuity matters just as much. One-off hackathons or short programs can spark interest, but without some form of sustained support, people drift away as soon as life or work gets in the way. What actually helps is a sequence: learning, a first contribution, follow-up contributions, and eventually some form of financial or institutional support that lets people keep going long enough to build real expertise.
Finally, there’s a social component that’s often underestimated. Feeling welcome, knowing who to ask, and having a small group of peers going through the same process makes a huge difference. Bitcoin is a global project, but people still learn and persist locally and socially.
Most new Bitcoin developers don’t primarily need more tutorials or more documentation. They need context, feedback, and continuity.
The hardest part is not writing code, but learning how Bitcoin development actually works: how to read a large and old codebase, how to scope changes that are realistic, how to communicate in issues and PRs, and how to receive review without getting discouraged. That knowledge is mostly implicit and rarely written down.
Early, high-quality feedback is critical. Many new contributors get stuck working in isolation for weeks, unsure if they’re heading in the right direction. A small course correction early on can save enormous amounts of time and frustration, but that requires experienced reviewers who are willing to engage before things are “perfect.”
Continuity matters just as much. One-off hackathons or short programs can spark interest, but without some form of sustained support, people drift away as soon as life or work gets in the way. What actually helps is a sequence: learning, a first contribution, follow-up contributions, and eventually some form of financial or institutional support that lets people keep going long enough to build real expertise.
Finally, there’s a social component that’s often underestimated. Feeling welcome, knowing who to ask, and having a small group of peers going through the same process makes a huge difference. Bitcoin is a global project, but people still learn and persist locally and socially.