Skip to main content

Notice: This Wiki is now read only and edits are no longer possible. Please see: for the plan.

Jump to: navigation, search

Google Summer of Code 2008 improvements

Some thoughts about the programme for next year

Maintaining an Eclipse projects for SOC is a rather poor fit with the Eclipse development process.

For 2008, we should consider (note that these are just ideas for discussion):

  • SOC Students must be treated the same way as other committers.
    • Specifically, they should be elected into the position and are subject to the same requirements
  • If a student's work is related to an existing project, they would follow the same process as anybody else
    • Student contribute code through bugzilla like anybody else. That code can be put into CVS by a committer (possibly the mentor) assuming that it meets with standard requirements.
    • Projects can set up an incubator if they deem it necessary.
    • If, over time, the student demonstrates that they are a worthy committer, an election is held.
  • If a student's work is not related to an existing project, then a separate home needs to be found
    • For example, a Google Code project (which sort of makes sense)
    • Over the term, the student can consider going through the proposal process to make their project into a real Eclipse project.

The short version is that GSoC students should not be treated any different than other committers.

This is good because:

  • Students experience the real Eclipse process.
  • It doesn't screw up our process, or reinforce dangerous precedence for bending the rules.
  • Lowers dependence on Eclipse Foundation infrastructure to get projects going.

This is bad because:

  • Will really only work if mentors are already Eclipse committers.
  • Mentors become a bottleneck for getting code committed (though this is probably not necessarily a problem)

It may seem a little elitist, but it's probably reasonable for us to require that mentors be Eclipse committers.

See Also

Back to the top