1 |
(GSoC project mentors in CC) |
2 |
|
3 |
Hi, |
4 |
|
5 |
I would like to ask our this year's GSoC mentors a single question: why |
6 |
weren't the GSoC proposals given proper discussion on our regular |
7 |
mailing lists *before* they were accepted? |
8 |
|
9 |
I can understand that most developers in Gentoo don't really care about |
10 |
GSoC. However, both projects we have this year [1] involve major |
11 |
changes to ::gentoo that -- by policy -- require prior RFC. In case |
12 |
of the BLAS/LAPACK project there was a RFC *after* the project was |
13 |
accepted, that was never fully answered. In case of the MPI project, |
14 |
I'm not aware of any public RFC or announcement. |
15 |
|
16 |
I believe such decisions put all of us in a very bad position. There is |
17 |
a major work going on, almost secretly. In the end, we will either be |
18 |
forced to accept the result even if it doesn't meet our expectations, or |
19 |
reject it and turn GSoC into some kind of grotesque situation. |
20 |
|
21 |
The former is of course unacceptable from my point of view. It would |
22 |
mean that one or two developers are able to abuse paid programs such |
23 |
as GSoC to unilaterally push their preferences into Gentoo. We would be |
24 |
forced to accept them unconditionally just because 'it's a done deal'. |
25 |
|
26 |
The latter means the students has wasted their summer doing work that's |
27 |
not going anywhere. This is certainly demotivating and a bad PR for |
28 |
Gentoo. I suppose it also reduces our chance of getting into GSoC |
29 |
again, if Google finds out that GSoC is spent on code going to trash. |
30 |
|
31 |
So, again, why do single developers unilaterally decide on which |
32 |
projects third party money is spent, and never bother discussing whether |
33 |
those projects are really applicable beforehand? |
34 |
|
35 |
[1] https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/organizations/6416323580526592/ |
36 |
|
37 |
-- |
38 |
Best regards, |
39 |
Michał Górny |