it will be an irrelevant question, but do you think that contributing to an open source is becoming a standard thing now?
This is a good thing for both sides - people who really do have the passion to code all the time have an advantage at getting better jobs, more pay. And those who don't have better work/life balance. Neither choice is wrong, they just have different consequences.
But because both choices exist, open source participation will not be a standard thing.
If the entire stack is open source based (most of devops that isn't Windows, for example), it certainly gives you lots more opportunities if you can show that you know what you're talking about, and if your name rings a bell with people in that space.
For developing line of business java/.net applications (which is a _huge_ field) open source contributions don't matter on the resume and might even be a net negative.
Different people will consume your resume in different ways. Automated resume-digesting systems and recruiters might get excited and tag your profile with keywords associated with those open source projects. Or they might not know what to do with the information and throw it away. Similarly for HR. Flesh and blood engineers screening your resume may get excited if they read that far. But once you've made it past the resume screening stage, it'll likely be completely irrelevant, except in the unlikely case that you're being hired for a gig specifically based on your experience with one or more of your contributions.
It is something tech-knowledgeable companies would be interested in, and tech-naive recruiters will notice even if they can't judge it (I used to work for a recruitment company so heard lots of conversations).
this hits especially women who are still most often made responsible for housework and childcare, but it also hits others who maybe have to care for someone or value family life over their career.