On Sun, 2008-02-24 at 14:28 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 09:30:00AM -0500, john cliff wrote:
> > I'd have thought that kills a lot of potential. How about we just make them
> > use branches rather than head and are more selective about when it gets
> > checked back into head? Its probably also a function of the number of them,
> > maybe we should take less so that we dont tie up as many devs and cause as
> > much churn?
>
> It does impose some constraints, but I think it's a better option than
> sitting out SoC entirely this year. And constraints can sometimes have
> benefits - like doing B&W photography, it can eliminate a lot of
> complexity and let you focus on what really matters in your work.
>
> We've certainly encouraged SoC'ers to use branches in the past. In this
> case it wouldn't help - it delays the added integration work, but doesn't
> let us avoid it. Indeed, given that our refactoring work is likely to
> move files around in the tree, eliminate some APIs and add others, the
> integration could become even more work than usual, and the more it's
> delayed the more work it becomes.
>
> For similar reasons, while reducing the number of SoC projects may help,
> I think we maximize our benefit by having no inkscape-core SoC
> projects. A related idea would be to have the SoC projects be focused
> on the cleanup and refactoring work; I'm undecided on this - refactoring
> can require a depth of experience with the codebase that a fresh person
> may not have, but on the other hand if well directed a smart
> enthusiastic student could help steamroll through the work.
>
> > Half the idea is to get them working in a project environment too, which
> > isolating them to extensions wont do either.
>
> I agree that it's beneficial to give them a good project environment
> experience, but I don't think this will be isolating. Indeed, if all
> the projects are doing extension work, then they will be able to
> collaborate, share notes, code, and ideas and build up an inkscape
> extensions sub-community.
>
> Obviously, it will be critical that we have good mentors who can help
> build this environment, and I'd consider this as a strong
> pre-requisite.
>
> Bryce