[Soc-coordination] Update: provisional number of slots is *still* 10

[Rudy Godoy Guillén]

El día 14/04/2008 a 01:25 Manoj Srivastava escribió...

> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 07:29:37 +0200, Fabio Tranchitella <kobold at kobold.it> said: 
> 
> > Hello all,
> > * 2008-04-14 01:45, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >> This is now looking unlikely. Leslie has just posted a new list to
> >> the mentors list this evening, and we're still listed with 10. I'm
> >> going to try and argue our case tomorrow for more, but (in her words)
> >> "there are only 60 slots left, and there are 175 organizations, most
> >> of whom would likely want to mentor additional students".
> 
> > Especially after this news, I'd like to ask to all mentors to read and
> > score the PAM/NSS proposal. I really think it is a valid idea and a
> > good proposal, but the opinion among the mentors is not clear yet.
> 
> > Thanks in advance,
> 
>         Are we actively promoting our favourite proposals?  If so, the
>  merging configuration files during upgrade are also valid ideas and
>  goot proposals; and one of the students has recently updated the
>  comments and added a pointer to a detailed time line.
> 
>         However, before everyone breaks out into an impassioned plea for
>  their particular proposal, may I suggest we can the campaigning and
>  tell people to review _all_ proposals near the cusp, to see if we are
>  drawing the line at the correct point? Our favourite proposals might
>  not turn out to be the ones pulled above.

I'm currently reviewing the top 15 ones, have reviewed all the others
already. I'd like to note a couple of things.

The broader group of aplications have problems on the details,
objetives, relevance and timeline. Those have gotten lot of reviews
which have made them rank lower.

The top ones have also received many reviews/votes particulary from
their potential mentors which is good, and they seem likely to be the
ones. 

On the other side there's a group which haven't got enough
reviews/votes. So, we have a number proposals on middle which needs
atention in order to be able to determine their elegibility or not. 

I'd like to ask people to also check those ones to have an enough
amount of votes and to be fair with their ranking/decision.

The other thing that we probably should agree is the items we are
checking for when evaluating. I liked the ones that Charles have used:
- Well written application 
- Clear goal 
- Not insider 
- Useful project

I'm also considering:
- Relevance for Debian
- Skills to sucessfully achieve the goal
- free software development model approach (reuse of previous work,
  interaction with existing teams)

regards

-- 
Rudy Godoy | 0x3433BD21 | http://www.htu.com.pe              ,''`.
http://www.apesol.org  -  http://www.debian.org              : :' :
GPG FP: 0D12 8537 607E 2DF5 4EFB  35A7 550F 1A00 3433 BD21   `. `'
                                                               `-
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/soc-coordination/attachments/20080414/108fa504/attachment.pgp