Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 09:21:42AM +0000, Dave Page wrote: >> Tom Lane wrote: >>> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>> Well, here's a question. Given the recent discussion re full >>>> disjunction, I'd like to know what sort of commitment we are going to >>>> give people who work on proposed projects. >>> Um, if you mean are we going to promise to accept a patch in advance of >>> seeing it, the answer is certainly not. Still, a SoC author can improve >>> his chances in all the usual ways, primarily by getting discussion and >>> rough consensus on a spec and then on an implementation sketch before >>> he starts to do much code. Lots of showstopper problems can be caught >>> at that stage. >> We cannot necessarily expect the students to work this way without >> guidance if they are not familiar with our processes before they start. >> The mentors should be there to guide not just with the technical aspects >> of the project, but the procedural as well imho. > > IIRC, last time we had a pgsql-students (or similar) mailinglist for the > SoC people. That was closed. Perhaps that's a bit counterproductive - it's > better to get introduced to the "normal way of doing things" right away? > With the help of the mentor, of course.
Yes. The other issue though is that initial project proposal scoring and discussion is done on a private Google site by the mentors. I don't know if we're allowed to make the proposals public before they get accepted by Google in case the students copy or improve each others proposals. >From their (and Google's) point of view their proposals are essentially job applications. Once they've been ranked, and Google have approved the top-N projects I guess it's open season! Regards, Dave ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
