[Sugar-devel] Request to review GSoC Proposal

[James Cameron]

Thanks Yash.  I've reviewed, and have no further comments.

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 05:53:13PM +0530, Yash Agrawal wrote:
> *
> Iteration 1 of GSoC : [1]https://docs.google.com/document/d/
> 1SLCS5CLv_j1yjnk6RuIS7gdOKxJ2XvNUqzbMR0Zxn7U/edit#
> 
> Hello Carlos,
> 
> Thanks for your review. I have already tested every activity I mentioned on the
> list. I have added a buffer week to release to all activities which were not
> released because of testing delay or any hard bug to solve. I am also flexible
> with the timeline I proposed, any changes can be made after discussion with
> mentors. Without actually diving deep into their code, it will be very hard to
> know if any difficult issue will arise. If this case arises, I am willing to
> work extra hours to keep up with the timeline.
>  
> Hello James,
> 
> I have tried to make every change you suggested. Please review.
> 
> Anyone
> 
> ‌
> 
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 3:40 AM, James Cameron <[2]quozl at laptop.org> wrote:
> 
>     On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:26:48PM +0530, Yash Agrawal wrote:
>     > I have completed the first draft of my GSoC Proposal. Please review
>     > and give your suggestions. Any suggestion/request for an activity to
>     > port is also welcomed.
> 
>     Your work so far on porting activities to GTK+ 3 has been very good,
>     so I don't expect any significant problems that can't be solved by
>     asking questions or more coding.
> 
>     I've reviewed and have some comments;
> 
>     - where the proposal template asks "please send us URLs", and "some
>       other demonstration of your work", you might add your GitHub profile
>       URL and some of the pull requests you've worked on recently.  You do
>       mention these much later, but it is good to answer the question.
> 
>       (because although some of us know what you've been doing, the Google
>       Open Source team won't know this until you tell them).
> 
>     - use terms consistently and correctly, and avoid unnecessary
>       abbreviations; e.g. "pull request" instead of "PR", "Sugar" instead
>       of "sugar", "Sugar Toolkit" instead of {sugar-toolkit,
>       sugar-toolkit-gtk3}, "Ubuntu" instead of "ubuntu", "Fedora" instead
>       of "fedora", "GTK+ 2" instead of {GTK2, GTK+ 2.x, Gtk, Gtk+},
>       "GStreamer" instead of "GST", and (perhaps) "PyGObject API" instead
>       of "PyGI",
> 
>       (because the inconsistent use within the document, and against
>       external references, makes it harder to read).
> 
>     - in your list of activities, use the value for name from
>       [3]activity.info rather than the GitHub repository name,
> 
>       (because this is the name by which the activity is best known to
>       other people,)
> 
>     - the activity Labyrinth has a GTK+ 3 port already, and there are
>       several repositories that are not proper clones or forks.  See my
>       audit in [4]https://github.com/sugarlabs/laybrinth-activity/issues/1
> 
>     - you might plan how to encourage testing of your work by Sugar Labs
>       community,
> 
>     - you might mention how your work will be affected by or benefit from
>       the Port to Python 3 project,
>    
>     --
>     James Cameron
>     [5]http://quozl.netrek.org/
>     _______________________________________________
>     Sugar-devel mailing list
>     [6]Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>     [7]http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> 
> References:
> 
> [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SLCS5CLv_j1yjnk6RuIS7gdOKxJ2XvNUqzbMR0Zxn7U/edit#
> [2] mailto:quozl at laptop.org
> [3] http://activity.info/
> [4] https://github.com/sugarlabs/laybrinth-activity/issues/1
> [5] http://quozl.netrek.org/
> [6] mailto:Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> [7] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel


-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/