GSoC improvements

[Nikolaj Hald Nielsen]

> No, the alternative is that students commit faulty or poorly designed
> code and no one notices until days or weeks later when the code is
> already built more upon.
>
> This is what we're trying to avoid. :) I agree with the Lydia and this
> thread in general, we do need an explicit review process.

Having the student commit directly to trunk is _not_ an excuse for the
mentor to not review it. I actually think that having the mentor
approve it in a separate branch is a bigger risk as other developers
will start to get into a "oh, that must be ok as it has already been
reviewed by the mentor" mindset. Also the mentor might miss serious
issues in any case, in which case the pre commit review makes no
difference.

Other issues I see is that mentors also have a life and might be away
for a few days or a week (on holiday for instance) during this time,
the student cannot get any code, unless someone else takes over
reviewing the branch (who is not as familiar with the project)

And finally, and perhaps most of all, this is adding another layer of
indirection to the entire development process, making it harder to
keep track of what is going on.

So I say do what we have always done with new people. Get them to send
a patch the first few times, and once they get the hang of it, let
them commit directly to trunk while still keeping an eye on them and
reviewing changes. I really see no need for a different procedure for
this for GSoC

- Nikolaj