Re: Google Summer of Code 2013 (GSoC13)

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 18, 2013, 17:42 UTC
Message-ID: <20130218174239.GB22832@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <87ehgd1qq2.fsf@pctrast.inf.ethz.ch>

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 06:23:01PM +0100, Thomas Rast wrote:

> * We need an org admin.  AFAIK this was done by Peff and Shawn in
>   tandem last year.  Would you do it again?

I will do it again, if people feel strongly about Git being a part of it. However, I have gotten a little soured on the GSoC experience. Not because of anything Google has done; it's a good idea, and I think they do a fine of administering the program. But I have noticed that the work that comes out of GSoC the last few years has quite often not been merged, or not made a big impact in the codebase, and nor have the participants necessarily stuck around.

And I do not want to blame the students here (some of whom are on the cc list :) ). They are certainly under no obligation to stick around after GSoC ends, and I know they have many demands on their time. But I am also thinking about what Git wants to get out of GSoC (and to my mind, the most important thing is contributors).

As far as merged code, I think part of the problem is that git is fairly mature at this point. The most interesting projects are of a bigger scope than a student with no experience in the code base can do in a summer project. Maybe that means we need to do a better job of breaking projects down into reasonably sized sub-components. Or maybe it means the project is hitting a point of diminishing returns for GSoC. I don't know.

There are a few counterpoints I can think of:

  - Even though not all projects are winners, _some_ are. I see Carlos
    and Ram on the cc list, two people who started as GSoC students and
    stuck around.

  - There is also the angle that even if _Git_ doesn't benefit directly
    from people sticking around, those people may float into other open
    source projects and work on them. Which makes the world a better
    place on the whole.

So I don't know. Those are just some things that have been floating around in my head. Feel free to ignore or discuss.

But thanks for getting the ball rolling, Thomas. If we are going to do it, sooner is better, and if we aren't, then we should probably do so consciously, and not just miss the deadline accidentally. :)

Show 9 quoted lines

> * We should prepare an "ideas page".  Last year, Peff made one on
> 
>     https://github.com/peff/git/wiki/SoC-2012-Ideas
> 
>   I couldn't edit it there over git access[1], so I made a clone in "my"
>   github wiki:
> [...]
> [1]  That's a bit silly really, since I *can* edit it via the web
> interface.  Peff, perhaps you can get that fixed?

Ugh, I would have to write ruby code to fix that. I'll try to trick somebody else here into fixing it. :)

> [2]  Unless Peff wants to take it over again?  You could just pull it
> from the git version, it's based on your history.

I think it is as good on your repo as on mine. The kernel.org wiki is also up, and the github/peff/git one was supposed to be temporary. But I really hate any wiki that I cannot edit with vim. I guess we need to have a discussion as a group about where the "official" wiki should live, and it should go there (I can also put it at github/git/git, which is a more sane place; but I do not want to compete with kernel.org's wiki unless there is community consensus that we are moving).

-Peff