On 04/22/2015 06:58 PM, Karsten Wade wrote: > On 04/22/2015 10:34 AM, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote: >> 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: > > We've also got short timing in that: > > * Proposals have to be accepted and paired with a mentor by Thursday > midnight (unsure of TZ.) > > * The de-duplication process is going on currently, we have conflicts > with 3 of 6 students where they are also 'accepted' by other projects. > We need to work with the other projects to decide who gets the > student. I'll be sending out the rest of those emails shortly. > > For example, our #1 doc student has rated a higher preference for a > GNOME project, so rather than try to do a last minute project split I > may let him go there and take the #2 student (who is also good enough > by far.) who are the other 2 with conflicts ? > > So until we +1 _both_ of the kpatch students, we don't know if the > second one has a conflict, and that conflict resolution appears to be > manual (I think I saw the Google folks pushing conflicts manually, > anyway, unsure how the notification works.) we can likely ping them, they tend to respond fairly quickly. > > - Karsten > > >>> 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 >>> > > > >> _______________________________________________ CentOS-gsocadmin >> mailing list CentOS-gsocadmin at centos.org >> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-gsocadmin > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-gsocadmin mailing list > CentOS-gsocadmin at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-gsocadmin > -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc