On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 08:13:53AM -0700, Karsten Wade wrote: > Swiping an idea from Ruby SOC, what do you all think about having 1/2 > projects that are smaller in scope, designed to run in 1/2 the time of > a full project, and have 1/2 of the stipend? > > == full project == > > * ~10 weeks > * Full scope > * $5000 > > == half project == > > * ~5 weeks > * Smaller scope > * $2500 > One word of warning here -- even if the student has gotten acquainted with the project before the start of the five weeks, there's still some amount of time that they spend getting a feel for stuff. For instance, they may know who they're supposed to talk to and what the source code looks like but they may still not know how best to submit code for review. This kind of stuff will be fairly constant whether it's a full or half project so, proportionally, you have less time spent coding in the half project. Another thought around this -- have we considered a formalized bounty system for small tasks? I think it takes quite a bit more work to organize since these need to have clearly defined deliverables, be a small enough chunk that you're never left wondering if the bounty is being fulfilled by the person who took it, and have enough of them that the students looking at them have adequate choice to choose from. But they seem to me to be a better method of organizing small tasks since they're very much about providing a deliverable rather than working on a feature specification where there's a question of whether partial work still deserves to be paid for. I think the google highly open participation contest took this form: http://code.google.com/opensource/ghop/2007-8/ -Toshio -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/summer-coding/attachments/20100425/3bc7ff99/attachment.bin
