Re: GSoC 2014: Summary so far, discussion starter: how to improve?

Fredrik Gustafsson [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

* Break projects into smaller, easier tasks
  - They should individually be simple, quick things if the mentor did
    them.
  - Should be parallelizable so students don't have to block on reviews.

I'd 5-6 smaller projects setup for the summer, I think I managed to do
2-3 of them. (I did however do everything I applied for). I really think
it's an excellent idea. This also meant that while one patch waited for
review, I'd other things to work on.

Lots of kudo points for Jens and Heiko :-)

quoted

* Mentoring improvements:
  - Always have a co-mentor
  - Focus on social aspects (who to Cc, etc.)
  - Nominate separate "review mentors" to ensure fast review cycles

I like the idea of review mentors. However bear in mind that you'll
already have three people reviewing the patches (two mentors and Junio).
We will not make it look like it's impossible to get things into
git.git.

I think the idea was not that you'd get *more* reviews, but that there
would be a group of volunteers doing reviews to ensure that they arrive
fast.  Students should have feedback within 1-2 days of the series being
posted.

The other advantages are that it provides a set of fresh eyes, and takes
load off Junio.

I'm not even sure how official we have to make this.  In Thomas
Gummerer's case, Michael stepped up with reviews when I couldn't.  So
maybe it'll again "just work out".  But I would like to take this role,
and leave the "social" mentoring to others.

-- 
Thomas Rast
tr@thomasrast.ch