On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]> wrote: > I think we, Lucene committers, need to identify who is willing to mentor. > In my experience, it is less than 5 hours a week. Most of the work is done > as part of the community. Sometimes you have to be tough and fail someone (I > did last year) but most of the time, if you take the time to interview the > candidates up front, it is a good experience for everyone.
count me in > > I'd add it would be useful to have everyone put the lucene-gsoc-11 label on > their issues too, that way we can quickly find the Lucene ones. done on at least one ;) simon > > Also, feel free to label existing bugs. > > > On Mar 9, 2011, at 2:11 AM, Simon Willnauer wrote: > >> Hey David and all others who want to contribute to GSoC, >> >> the ASF has applied for GSoC 2011 as a mentoring organization. As a >> ASF project we don't need to apply directly though but we need to >> register our ideas now. This works like almost anything in the ASF >> through JIRA. All ideas should be recorded as JIRA tickets labeled >> with "gsoc2011". Once this is done it will show up here: >> http://s.apache.org/gsoc2011tasks >> >> Everybody who is interested in GSoC as a mentor or student should now >> read this too http://community.apache.org/gsoc.html >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Simon >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 12:14 PM, David Nemeskey >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Please find the implementation plan attached. The word "soon" gets a new >>> meaning when power outages are taken into account. :) >>> >>> As before, comments are welcome. >>> >>> David >>> >>> On Tuesday, February 22, 2011 15:22:57 Simon Willnauer wrote: >>>> I think that is good for now. I should get started on codeawards and >>>> wrap up our proposals. I hope I can do that this week. >>>> >>>> simon >>>> >>>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 3:16 PM, David Nemeskey >>>> >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Hey, >>>>> >>>>> I have written the proposal. Please let me know if you want more / less >>>>> of certain parts. Should I upload it somewhere? >>>>> >>>>> Implementation plan soon to follow. >>>>> >>>>> Sorry for the late reply; I have been rather busy these past few weeks. >>>>> >>>>> David >>>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, February 02, 2011 10:35:55 Simon Willnauer wrote: >>>>>> Hey David, >>>>>> >>>>>> I saw that you added a tiny line to the GSoC Lucene wiki - thanks for >>>>>> that. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 10:10 AM, David Nemeskey >>>>>> >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi guys, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mark, Robert, Simon: thanks for the support! I really hope we can work >>>>>>> together this summer (and before that, obviously). >>>>>> >>>>>> Same here! >>>>>> >>>>>>> According to http://www.google- >>>>>>> melange.com/document/show/gsoc_program/google/gsoc2011/timeline , >>>>>>> there's still some time until the application period. So let me use >>>>>>> this week to finish my PhD research plan, and get back to you next >>>>>>> week. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am not really familiar with how the program works, i.e. how detailed >>>>>>> the application description should be, when mentorship is decided, >>>>>>> etc. so I guess we will have a lot to talk about. :) >>>>>> >>>>>> so from a 10000ft view it work like this: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Write up a short proposal what your idea is about >>>>>> 2. make it public! and publish a implementation plan - how you would >>>>>> want to realize your proposal. If you don't follow that 100% in the >>>>>> actual impl. don't worry. Its just mean to give us an idea that you >>>>>> know what you are doing and where you want to go. something like a 1 >>>>>> A4 rough design doc. >>>>>> 3. give other people the change to apply for the same suggestion (this >>>>>> is how it works though) >>>>>> 4 Let the ASF / us assign one or more possible mentors to it >>>>>> 5. let us apply for a slot in GSoC (those are limited for organizations) >>>>>> 6. get accepted >>>>>> 7. rock it! >>>>>> >>>>>>> (Actually, should we move this discussion private?) >>>>>> >>>>>> no - we usually do everything in public except of discussion within >>>>>> the PMC that are meant to be private for legal reasons or similar >>>>>> things. Lets stick to the mailing list for all communication except >>>>>> you have something that should clearly not be public. This also give >>>>>> other contributors a chance to help and get interested in your work!! >>>>>> >>>>>> simon >>>>>> >>>>>>> David >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi David, honestly this sounds fantastic. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It would be great to have someone to work with us on this issue! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To date, progress is pretty slow-going (minor improvements, cleanups, >>>>>>>> additional stats here and there)... but we really need all the help >>>>>>>> we can get, especially from people who have a really good >>>>>>>> understanding of the various models. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In case you are interested, here are some references to discussions >>>>>>>> about adding more flexibility (with some prototypes etc): >>>>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/72787e0e54f798e4/baby >>>>>>>> _st eps _towards_making_lucene_s_scoring_more_flexible >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2392 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:32 AM, David Nemeskey >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have already sent this mail to Simon Willnauer, and he suggested >>>>>>>>> me to post it here for discussion. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I am David Nemeskey, a PhD student at the Eotvos Lorand University, >>>>>>>>> Budapest, Hungary. I am doing an IR-related research, and we have >>>>>>>>> considered using Lucene as our search engine. We were quite >>>>>>>>> satisfied with the speed and ease of use. However, we would like >>>>>>>>> to experiment with different ranking algorithms, and this is where >>>>>>>>> problems arise. Lucene only supports the VSM, and unfortunately >>>>>>>>> the ranking architecture seems to be tailored specifically to its >>>>>>>>> needs. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I would be very much interested in revamping the ranking component >>>>>>>>> as a GSoC project. The following modifications should be doable in >>>>>>>>> the allocated time frame: >>>>>>>>> - a new ranking class hierarchy, which is generic enough to allow >>>>>>>>> easy implementation of new weighting schemes (at least >>>>>>>>> bag-of-words ones), - addition of state-of-the-art ranking >>>>>>>>> methods, such as Okapi BM25, proximity and DFR models, >>>>>>>>> - configuration for ranking selection, with the old method as >>>>>>>>> default. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I believe all users of Lucene would profit from such a project. It >>>>>>>>> would provide the scientific community with an even more useful >>>>>>>>> research aid, while regular users could benefit from superior >>>>>>>>> ranking results. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please let me know your opinion about this proposal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > -------------------------- > Grant Ingersoll > http://www.lucidimagination.com/ > > Search the Lucene ecosystem docs using Solr/Lucene: > http://www.lucidimagination.com/search > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
