4 ms·

This is sad. It means that Google Summer of Code imposes too much bureaucracy onto Free Software projects. In other words, GSoC is only viable for those projec

by vog 10y ago

This is sad. It means that Google Summer of Code imposes too much bureaucracy onto Free Software projects. In other words, GSoC is only viable for those projects whohave enough spare volunteers to begin with.

throwaway2048 10y ago
I think in OpenBSD's case it was that, plus the fact that they got essentially zero code that was anywhere near their standards, or any devs willing to commit longer-term to improve it. If the results had been better, more mentors/devs would have been willing to step up. GSOC promotes dumps of low to mid quality code that then goes unmaintained. After all its focused on relatively junior programmers doing it for a nice stipend as part of their school experience for a summer (or so). GSOC is just a bad fit for the sort of quality and maintainership OpenBSD demands from its codebase and contributors. They have had a lot of years of experience with academic code mostly written as a proof of concept without an eye to maintainability that later rots in tree and makes everyone else's job worse.
- xienze 10y ago
  > They have had a lot of years of experience with academic code mostly written as a proof of concept without an eye to maintainability that later rots in tree and makes everyone else's job worse. Well you don't have to use interns to get production code. If that's a concern, they can be put to work doing something outside the main code base, like perhaps writing tools that speed up some tedious process. There's probably opportunity for OpenBSD to get something out of GSOC, but if the standard is "shippable code or bust", well, no wonder they're disappointed.
  - vog 10y ago
    Is there something similar to GSoC that does produce shippable code? (i.e. less emphasis on experimenting and more emphasis on quality and being accepted by upstream, perhaps by assigning "smaller" tasks)
  - throwaway2048 10y ago
    Sure, id say that shippable code really isnt the point of GSOC, but if they arnt getting long term contributors or useable code out of it, there isnt really any advantage for them to participate.
- tw04 10y ago
  How exactly is OpenBSD planning on getting more coders that can code to their standards if they aren't willing to teach anybody? NIH + an unwillingness to let anyone else into the house seems like an excellent way for a project to find itself facing the brink should 1 or 2 core developers leave the project for any reason. >without an eye to maintainability that later rots in tree and makes everyone else's job worse. ...that's the whole point of the mentors. IF that's what OpenBSD is getting out of GSoC, it's the mentor(s) fault, not GSoCs.
  - throwaway2048 10y ago
    They were willing to mentor people via GSoC, nobody stuck around (almost all the applicants do it for the money, rather than an interest in volenteering), ergo its not worth their time. Even in organizations that have a high priority towards onboarding new devs, GSoC retention rates are typically very low. They have no issues attracting devs via other channels.
  - SamReidHughes 10y ago
    2 core developers? It's a fact of life that college students suck in deep and vexatious ways at writing multithreaded C. They aren't even good 1 core developers. OpenBSD's recruitment targets should be more experienced people.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
dvfjsdhgfv 10y ago
On the other hand, if a student wishes to do OpenBSD-related work during the GSoC, they need to find another mentoring organization. Most are related to specific projects, but I think at least some of them, like the Apache Foundation, are general enough to at least consider mentoring such a project.
DannyBee 10y ago
"It means that Google Summer of Code imposes too much bureaucracy onto Free Software projects. In other words, GSoC is only viable for those projects whohave enough spare volunteers to begin with. " Except, as at least two people in this discussion, who are org admins, have said, they basically see no bureaucracy or overhead. So ... Usually, what this means is folks had unrealistic expectations. The truth is the coding level of even the average high end BS freshout is really not that great, so it usually takes actual mentorship and guidance to get good code out of GSoC. That's not "bureaucracy" though, unless you have an endless source of high quality coders willing to join your project, that's how you get anyone to be a good contributor.

by vog 10y ago

throwaway2048 10y ago

I think in OpenBSD's case it was that, plus the fact that they got essentially zero code that was anywhere near their standards, or any devs willing to commit longer-term to improve it. If the results had been better, more mentors/devs would have been willing to step up. GSOC promotes dumps of low to mid quality code that then goes unmaintained. After all its focused on relatively junior programmers doing it for a nice stipend as part of their school experience for a summer (or so). GSOC is just a bad fit for the sort of quality and maintainership OpenBSD demands from its codebase and contributors. They have had a lot of years of experience with academic code mostly written as a proof of concept without an eye to maintainability that later rots in tree and makes everyone else's job worse.

xienze 10y ago
> They have had a lot of years of experience with academic code mostly written as a proof of concept without an eye to maintainability that later rots in tree and makes everyone else's job worse. Well you don't have to use interns to get production code. If that's a concern, they can be put to work doing something outside the main code base, like perhaps writing tools that speed up some tedious process. There's probably opportunity for OpenBSD to get something out of GSOC, but if the standard is "shippable code or bust", well, no wonder they're disappointed.
- vog 10y ago
  Is there something similar to GSoC that does produce shippable code? (i.e. less emphasis on experimenting and more emphasis on quality and being accepted by upstream, perhaps by assigning "smaller" tasks)
- throwaway2048 10y ago
  Sure, id say that shippable code really isnt the point of GSOC, but if they arnt getting long term contributors or useable code out of it, there isnt really any advantage for them to participate.
tw04 10y ago
How exactly is OpenBSD planning on getting more coders that can code to their standards if they aren't willing to teach anybody? NIH + an unwillingness to let anyone else into the house seems like an excellent way for a project to find itself facing the brink should 1 or 2 core developers leave the project for any reason. >without an eye to maintainability that later rots in tree and makes everyone else's job worse. ...that's the whole point of the mentors. IF that's what OpenBSD is getting out of GSoC, it's the mentor(s) fault, not GSoCs.
- throwaway2048 10y ago
  They were willing to mentor people via GSoC, nobody stuck around (almost all the applicants do it for the money, rather than an interest in volenteering), ergo its not worth their time. Even in organizations that have a high priority towards onboarding new devs, GSoC retention rates are typically very low. They have no issues attracting devs via other channels.
- SamReidHughes 10y ago
  2 core developers? It's a fact of life that college students suck in deep and vexatious ways at writing multithreaded C. They aren't even good 1 core developers. OpenBSD's recruitment targets should be more experienced people.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

dvfjsdhgfv 10y ago

On the other hand, if a student wishes to do OpenBSD-related work during the GSoC, they need to find another mentoring organization. Most are related to specific projects, but I think at least some of them, like the Apache Foundation, are general enough to at least consider mentoring such a project.

DannyBee 10y ago

"It means that Google Summer of Code imposes too much bureaucracy onto Free Software projects. In other words, GSoC is only viable for those projects whohave enough spare volunteers to begin with. " Except, as at least two people in this discussion, who are org admins, have said, they basically see no bureaucracy or overhead. So ... Usually, what this means is folks had unrealistic expectations. The truth is the coding level of even the average high end BS freshout is really not that great, so it usually takes actual mentorship and guidance to get good code out of GSoC. That's not "bureaucracy" though, unless you have an endless source of high quality coders willing to join your project, that's how you get anyone to be a good contributor.