Neither. Merely stating that originally they were competing for one slot and we evaluated the proposals with the baseline of one idea. Now that the project proposal scope is being reviewed and extended, they need to put up new versions of their scope of work. Either on Melange or their code repo. This will ensure that changes in expectations are documented and considered during evaluation. On 22 Apr 2015 22:04, "Karanbir Singh" <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote: > On 04/22/2015 01:11 PM, Corey Henderson wrote: > > > >> On Apr 22, 2015, at 5:40 AM, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay < > sankarshan.mukhopadhyay at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Karanbir Singh <kbsingh at centos.org> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Both of the proposals for kpatch are solid. Corey - is there a way for > >>> both the guys to work together ? Would you be able to expand scope of > >>> what you were to deliver out from there if you had 2 of them hammering > >>> away at this ? Its clearly a complex problem space. > >> > >> If this is being considered as an option (for kpatch and > >> documentation) please ensure that the students have a clear idea of > >> the "new split proposal". Currently, they have proposed against one > >> single idea. As part of the GSoC roll-out, the organization desires > >> them to work on parts of that idea leading up to an integrated whole. > >> The re-working and scoping of the proposals need to happen accordingly > > > > I suppose one person can continue with the original scope of the kpatch > building and distribution automation, while the other focuses on patch > selection routines and safety infrastructure. However, the latter depends > upon the former in that it's pretty useless to have testing around > something you can't distribute, should the first part of it fall apart for > some reason. I suppose #2 is still worth doing standalone assume #1 is > eventually done. > > > > If you guys find this acceptable then I can work with them on altering > the proposals. What's the deadline of doing this last minute change? > > I am looking at it mostly from the point of view that if we have the > extra slot, then the two kpatch folks both seem to largely know what > they are doing - is this the best way to use that extra slot. > > Corey - if you feel that we can have two people hammer this through for > a double the result, then lets do it. > > Sankarshan - its not clear from your statement what the issue here is - > are you saying that the two people need to have independant goals and > work on an independant code base ? > > - KB > > > -- > Karanbir Singh > +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh > GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-gsocadmin mailing list > CentOS-gsocadmin at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-gsocadmin > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-gsocadmin/attachments/20150422/6620ec81/attachment-0006.html>