Campbell Barton wrote: > in a nutshell- these seem obvious. Indeed, but maybe some details aren't obvious... > 1. They must be able to compile the software (a few students ended > loosing time by not having a propper dev environment) They must be able to build current CVS. This is different from building a stable version or even an older 2.3 tarball, as the required versions of Glib and GTK+ have been raised and additional tools are required as well. > 2. They must be able to submit a patch- (for blender, we are even > requiring they write a small patch and submit, as a requirement > for being an applicant ) How did you handle applying the patches? From http://mediawiki.blender.org/index.php/BlenderDev/SOC_2006_ideas, I see that Blender is requesting weekly status reports, are patch reviews/commits coupled to this? > 4. Must be able to devote full time. no summer jobs, courses. (had > some problems with this also) How did you solve them? Did you ask the students to devote more time on the SoC project, or did you have to cancel some projects? Michael -- The GIMP > http://www.gimp.org | IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/gimp Wiki > http://wiki.gimp.org | .de: http://gimpforum.de Plug-ins > http://registry.gimp.org | _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
