Organizations that contributed more than 100 changesets to the recently released 2.6.23 kernel included:
Red Hat with 827 changesets (11.7%)
IBM with 557 changesets (7.9%)
The Linux Foundation with 528 changesets (7.5%)
Novell with 449 changesets (6.3%)
Intel with 242 changesets (3.4%)
Oracle with 158 changesets (2.2%)
MIPS Technologies with 143 changesets (2%)
Nokia with 133 changesets (1.9%)
NetApp with 119 changesets (1.7%)The largest number of the changesets (843, at 11.9%) were contributed by individuals reporting no sponsor for their work. All sources included, there were a total of 7,075 changesets from 992 developers working for 126 different employers.

http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Who_Sponsors_Kernel_Development

So, the individual coder still thrives in the Linux open source environment, but large corporations have stepped up with kernel updating and patching. :)

What caught the author's eye with this patch set was the fact that it is being posted by some developers at Volkswagen. It is not uncommon to see Linux used in any number of embedded applications, and it is not surprising to see companies extending Linux in ways which make it more useful for their purposes--the ability to do so is one of the reasons for using Linux in the first place. But it is rather less common to see companies whose core competence is far from kernel hacking try to contribute changes back to the mainline.http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;11338500

This is what originally appealed to me with open source projects. If I found a bug, I could simply fix it myself. If a port to my platform didn't exist, just do it myself. This is even more critical for large companies. Instead of waiting for some third party to fix a bug in some unknown code, simply fix it and get on with the project. Never mind the cost of the O/S or application. It's win-win for everyone. It's also amazing that so many companies just don't get it. They tie their developers into expensive, proprietary software that often causes more problems than it solves. :confused: