Re: Git in Outreachy Dec-Mar?

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Aug 30, 2018, 11:46 UTC
Message-ID: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1808301340280.71@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
In-Reply-To: <20180830031607.GB665@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Hi Peff,

On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, Jeff King wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

>   - it naturally limits the candidate pool to under-represented groups
>     (which is the whole point of the program, but if you don't
>     actually care about that, then it's just a complication)
> 
> So IMHO it's easily worth the trouble.

I am willing to mentor, and the only reason that kept me from already stepping forward and trying to brush up the landing page is this concern: traditionally, we (as in: the core Git contributors) have been less than successful in attracting and retaining contributors from under-represented groups. I don't think any regular reader of this mailing list can deny that.

And while I find it very important to reach out (there are just *so* many benefits to having a more diverse team), I have to ask *why* we are so unsuccessful. As long as we do not even know the answer to that, is it even worth pursuing Outreachy?

I mean, if we make serious mistakes here, without even realizing, that directly lead to being stuck in our old bubble, then we are prone to simply repeat those mistakes over and over and over again. And that would just be a waste of our time, *and* a big de-motivator for the Outreachy students.

What's your take on this?

Ciao, Dscho