-----Original Message----- From: Engelen, J.B.C. (Johan) Sent: dinsdag 25 januari 2011 11:47 To: 'Alexandre Prokoudine'; Inkscape Devel List Subject: RE: [Inkscape-devel] GSoC 2011 announced
-----Original Message----- From: Alexandre Prokoudine [mailto:alexandre.prokoudine@...400...] Sent: dinsdag 25 januari 2011 7:45 To: Inkscape Devel List Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] GSoC 2011 announced
On 1/25/11, Tavmjong Bah wrote:
- I may be wrong, but I have the sense that we have a
fairly high
failure rate for accepted projects. What can we do to improve the project selection?
Not exactly high. The previous year was a 2/5 failure
indeed, but the
year before was 100% success, if my memory serves me well,
and we are
talking about 6 or 7 projects in 2009.
One of disappeared students last year had been around in
the community
for a rather long time, and the other disappeared student did a successful project for GIMP in 2009, so it's quite possible that we just had our bit of bad luck. We did have disappearing students in even earlier GSoCs though. IIRC, this is where the "two patches" rule comes from.
There was some discussion on the GSoC mentor list about this some months ago. I think what I learned from that is that when selecting students, one should ignore the awesome feature that is proposed, but look at the student's skills instead. Also, I think we/I "forgot" about the two-patches-rule. Note that this rule is not only to assess coding capability, but also to see if the student is capable of actually building Inkscape on his PC (yes, this was a time-consuming problem in last year's SoC). Perhaps a good idea to make it easier for aspiring students is to provide a list of "easy" to tackle bugs or very small improvements. Perhaps this is more important than a list of GSoC projects.
Following up on my previous mail, I have started a list of suggestions here: http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/Google_Summer_Of_Code#The_.22two _patches.22_rule