1,190
edits
Difference between revisions of "Summer of Code/Application/2015"
Summer of Code/Application/2015 (view source)
Revision as of 22:11, 11 February 2015
, 22:11, 11 February 2015→If you chose "veteran" in the checkbox, please summarize your involvement in Google Summer of Code and the successes and challenges of your participation. Please also list your pass/fail rate for each year.
Strangerke (talk | contribs) |
Strangerke (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
=== If you chose "veteran" in the checkbox, please summarize your involvement in Google Summer of Code and the successes and challenges of your participation. Please also list your pass/fail rate for each year. === | === If you chose "veteran" in the checkbox, please summarize your involvement in Google Summer of Code and the successes and challenges of your participation. Please also list your pass/fail rate for each year. === | ||
We have participated in the GSoC program for the last eight years. From 2007-2014. | |||
Below are details of the successes and challenges we have encountered grouped by year. | |||
2014: 5 students mentored by 8 mentors and co-mentors. | |||
All the students passed. Two of them were working on ScummVM tasks, three of them on the ResidualVM tasks. Two students are still active, and consider participating again in GSoC this year as a student. Merging the code early still shows benefits, so we'll keep this rule during our next GSoC. | |||
2013: 4 students mentored by 6 team members. Each mentor was also co-mentor of another task. | |||
All the students passed, and 2 students are still actively contributing the project and one student is still regularly on our IRC channel. One of the active students would also like to participate again in GSoC this year as a student. Merging code earlier gave excellent results and we'll do the same if possible this year in order to build on the great results of this year. | |||
2012: 4 students mentored by 5 team members. Each mentor was also the co-mentor of another task. | |||
3 students passed, and one failed at mid-term. One student is still actively contributing to the project and volunteered to be a mentor for GSoC 2013 and GSoC 2014, which is really awesome. Based on discussion with other projects and our experience one of the key outcomes from this year was to look at merging student code earlier in the GSoC process and encouraging students to be much closer to mainline development. We modified our processes accordingly for the next year. | |||
2011: 2 students mentored by 4 team members. Each mentor was also the co-mentor of another task. | |||
1 student succeeded in objectifying the CruisE engine, which really needed it. The other student unfortunately gave up fairly quickly after starting work (although the work done was eventually merged into our main repository, after being worked on further by a team member). After stepping back to review our processes, we feel we can still consider them to be mature. Part of the problems which caused the student to quickly give up came from internal tensions, that we have since addressed by redefining the project management structure. | |||
2010: 4 students mentored by 6 team members. Each mentor was also the co-mentor of another task. | |||
All four passed the finals this time, and we merged in their code. One student still continues to contribute to the project. We addressed several long standing project needs and this was a very good year for the project. | |||
2009: 5 students mentored by 6 team members. Some co-mentoring happened. | |||
4 of our students passed, and one failed the finals. The year was a the success and all the students' code was merged within three months into the main development line. We considered this to be a good outcome. | |||
2008: 6 students mentored by 7 mentors. | |||
5 of our students were so successful that their code is included in the mainline of ScummVM, and we consider it a great achievement that 4 of the students continued to contribute to the project afterwards. | |||
2007: 7 students mentored by 4 mentors. | |||
5 of our students passed. Two of our students continued to become active, regular developers in the team after having their respective code contributions integrated in the codebase. Two of the students did not succeeded in their projects. | |||
All in all, we maintain that we have been refining our method of student selection and balancing the workload and commitment required to achieve great outcomes in the past years and this refinement leads to generally better results each year. | |||
The discussions, testimonials and proposed actions which the mentor summit has raised - and which we have participated in during our involvement with GSoC - have helped us a great deal. Our new wider management organization has also proven its efficiency during these last 3 years. Being an umbrella for ResidualVM made us work together more than ever before, and we hope to continue improving the experience for all parties in the future. | |||
Summary pass/fail: 2014: 5/0 2013: 4/0 2012: 3/1 2011: 1/1 2010: 4/0 2009: 4/1 2008: 5/1 2007: 5/2 | |||
=== Why is your organization applying to participate in Google Summer of Code 2015? What do you hope to gain by participating? === | === Why is your organization applying to participate in Google Summer of Code 2015? What do you hope to gain by participating? === | ||
=== How many potential mentors do you have for this year's program? What criteria did you use to select them? === | === How many potential mentors do you have for this year's program? What criteria did you use to select them? === | ||