| [soc-dev] Reviewing proposals |
|
Greetings GSoC mentors. The proposal evaluation period is starting soon (the system is actually already open so we can start evaluating and scoring immediately). I will take a pass over all of the proposals to attempt to identify and remove the bogus ones. If something looks bogus to you, feel free to indicate your suspicion in a private comment. Feel free to engage with the student via comments if you want to know more about the proposal, or ask for refinements. Make sure that you pay heed to the "private" checkbox when you submit your comment. Private comments are restricted to the mentors and administrators. Public comments are, well, public. I intend to keep the default five-point scoring range. We can increase this if there is broad consensus. Does anybody feel that a wider scoring range would be of value? Now... here's the hard part... Mentors, if you do decide to score one proposal, you have to score others. Ideally, all mentors should score all proposals. But if everybody scores some reasonable subset of the proposals, the effect should average out about right. Here's how I recommend that we score: 0 - (no score) Proposal has no value; 1, 2 - Proposal has potential, but needs considerable work; 3 - The proposal looks good, but is outside of your area of expertise. No opinion. 4 - Proposal shows great promise 5 - We need this. You should only volunteer to mentor projects that you score with five (5). When you're looking at the proposal, please consider the following aspects: * Relevance of the proposal to the project and community; * Probability that the work will be absorbed into project code; * Belief in the student's ability to deliver; and * Likelihood of the student staying involved with the project and becoming a committer. I am open to suggestions. Feel free to augment these recommendations or suggest alternatives. Thanks, Wayne --
Wayne Beaton The Eclipse Foundation Twitter: @waynebeaton   |