[Sugar-devel] [OLPC-GSoC] Fwd: Google Summer of Code 2009 is a go!

[Sharon Lally]

SJ, it sounds like a good plan....but  OLPC/1CC had problems retaining
mentors last year, so make sure not to over-commit.  The remaining OLPC
staff may not have time to mentor.
Sharon



On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Samuel Klein <sj at laptop.org> wrote:

> I'm copying our own gsoc list, and glad to clarify how this should work.
>
> I mentioned to Leslie yesterday that I expected SugarLabs and OLPC
> might have  separate GSOC projects this year.  Someone representing SL
> should write and formally get on their list of supported
> organizations.  [note: this requires tax/ID information for SL]
>
> OLPC is interested in participating in GSOC this year... some of the
> projects I imagine would be activities or software for creation that
> would work particularly with the XO's hardware, or would help needs in
>  OLPC deployments.
>
> It would be alright for both SugarLabs and OLPC to have people working
> on code that could be integrated into Sugar (note the different
> activity-development and python coding that was done both as an OLPC
> SoC project and via other orgs who wanted their projects to be useful
> to OLPC as an audience).  It is also possible to submit an application
> to more than one organization.
>
> I recommend noting in our organization descriptions (and definition of
> what we are looking for) that people who want to develop tools and
> features for Sugar should apply to SL, and people who want to develop
> things specifically for OLPC deployments, or other software puzzles
> specific to XOs, should apply to OLPC.
>
> I would encourage most activity developers and activity mentors to
> tackle SoC projects under sugarlabs...
>
> SJ
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Ed McNierney <ed at laptop.org> wrote:
> > Yes, but in 2007 "they" were "us", no?
> >
> > Thanks, this is helpful information (I didn't know the status of
> > OLPC's previous GSoC work).  I don't see why there is any reason to
> > presume that OLPC would NOT be interested in 2009 GSoC, but I don't
> > know of any active ideas/proposals kicking around here.  I would
> > strongly encourage Sugar Labs ideas, however - to Ben's point, there
> > should be no confusion.  The only things I could imagine (and it's
> > just imagining) coming from OLPC would be ancillary ideas (school
> > server add-ons?) that would be quite distinct from XO/Sugar software.
> > Go for it!
> >
> >        - Ed
> >
> >
> > On Jan 8, 2009, at 3:54 PM, Wade Brainerd wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at sugarlabs.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>> We should take into account that organizations are assigned slots
> >>> based on their well behaviour in past editions.
> >>
> >> To be clear, OLPC was put on GSoC 'probation' last year due to their
> >> poor performance reporting on students' work in 2007.  They only
> >> received 4 slots despite hundreds of applications.
> >>
> >> Wade
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sugar-devel mailing list
> >> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sugar-devel mailing list
> > Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Gsoc mailing list
> Gsoc at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/gsoc
>



-- 
Sharon Lally
Director, Human Resources
One Laptop Per Child
617.452.5680
sharon at laptop.org
www.laptop.org


Give a Laptop. Get a Laptop.  Change the world!  Visit
http://www.laptop.org/en/ for more information.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20090109/ca8f5c5a/attachment-0001.htm