GSoC improvements

[Mark Kretschmann]

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Dan Meltzer
<parallelgrapefruit at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Lydia Pintscher <lydia at kde.org> wrote:
>> I have been thinking about what we can improve this year wrt to the
>> code that gets written during GSoC. As last year was the first year we
>> had a lot of newcomers as students I think there are some things we
>> can improve this year on the coding side.
>> One big problem last year was that some students commited huge chunks
>> of code that only very few people or even no-one reviewed post commit.
>> So I guess we should make it very very clear that we want to see
>> smaller commits on a more regular basis.
>> Is there anything else that could be useful? What is your opinion on a
>> more formal code review pre or post commit?
>
> I feel like the mentor should be responsible for code review of the
> student.  I think we need to setup crucible to make this more doable
> (it's annoying to review code on the mailing list).  Whether or not it
> happens pre or post commit can probably be left up to the
> mentor/student pair, or perhaps reccomend pre-commit review for the
> first few commits, and then when the mentor feels confident that the
> student will a) maintain style and b) has a good idea of the overall
> amarok design, it could switch to post-commit review.

I simply don't have the time to review every single commit. While this
is a fine idea in theory, in reality there needs to be a certain level
of trust between our students and us (btw, I don't believe in the
one-mentor-per-student concept - we always help where we can).

Additionally, what Ian said in another branch of this thread is
probably true: Git will help here a lot.

-- 
Mark Kretschmann
Amarok Developer
www.kde.org - amarok.kde.org