TrustedUser
2,147
edits
Difference between revisions of "Summer of Code/Application/2011"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
Summer of Code/Application/2011 (view source)
Revision as of 14:49, 10 March 2011
, 14:49, 10 March 2011→Did your organization participate in past GSoCs? If so, please summarize your involvement and the successes and challenges of your participation.: typos
m (Fixed a couple typos) |
|||
| Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
In 2010 we were granted 4 slots and had 6 mentors, thus we had nice backup mentoring for every student. 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 it was just excellent. | In 2010 we were granted 4 slots and had 6 mentors, thus we had nice backup mentoring for every student. 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 it was just excellent. | ||
In 2009 we had 5 students and 6 mentors. 4 our students passed, and one failed the finals. That year the success was so big that all the students' code was merged within three months into the main development line. We were considered to be mature in our processes by that time with excellent outcome. | In 2009 we had 5 students and 6 mentors. 4 of our students passed, and one failed the finals. That year the success was so big that all the students' code was merged within three months into the main development line. We were considered to be mature in our processes by that time with excellent outcome. | ||
In 2008 we had 6 students and 7 mentors. 5 of our students were so successful that their code is included in the mainline of ScummVM. Our latest release contains code from all 5. We consider a great achievement the fact that 4 of the students still continue to contribute to the project. We had one student severely underachieving | In 2008 we had 6 students and 7 mentors. 5 of our students were so successful that their code is included in the mainline of ScummVM. Our latest release contains code from all 5. We consider a great achievement the fact that 4 of the students still continue to contribute to the project. We had one student severely underachieving that year. Although his mentor helped him to a great extent, even going as far as writing portions of his task's code with him as a method to help him along, he still failed to even come close to completing the task. It is our assessment that the major problem was that he overestimated his free time to work on the project. We will be addressing this kind of issue this year by using several methods, such as requiring a more detailed task schedule, explicitly asking about prior commitments and conducting interviews with the students. | ||
In 2007 we had 7 students and 4 mentors in total. Two of our students have been promoted to active, regular developers in the team after having their respective code contributions integrated in the codebase. One other student's code contributions have also been integrated in the mainline. Two more have their code still in development to improve it and make it production-ready, either through optimization or extension and better integration. Two students failed to keep up with the schedule and/or produced inadequate code. | In 2007 we had 7 students and 4 mentors in total. Two of our students have been promoted to active, regular developers in the team after having their respective code contributions integrated in the codebase. One other student's code contributions have also been integrated in the mainline. Two more have their code still in development to improve it and make it production-ready, either through optimization or extension and better integration. Two students failed to keep up with the schedule and/or produced inadequate code. | ||