I've spent a bit of time looking into the Outreachy process and I'd like to summarize my understanding:
1. Pre-application: Communities choose prospective mentors to work with prospective interns. Apache communities who wish to participate must provide suitable mentors. 2. Application: Prospective interns select projects and work with mentors to make contributions to projects. 3. Selection: Communities review applicants and choose those whose contributions indicate they will make good interns. 4. Internship period: Interns work full time for three months with the mutually-selected communities. 5. Program reviews: Interns evaluate mentors and communities; mentors and communities evaluate interns. What does Apache get from this? During pre-application, identifying suitable mentors may help communities understand themselves better. During application, communities may get feedback on barriers to entry that under-represented people face. All of this is without $payment to/from Apache/Outreachy. During internship, projects get more detail on how the community enables contributions from under-represented people, and get some code (programming/doc/ux/build/release) contributions. During program reviews, communities get feedback on how to reduce barriers to entry and how to increase/encourage participation. Given the D&I objectives for this program, I'd say that code is a byproduct and not the deliverable. If the objective of the program were code deliverables, this process would be completely different. And we would certainly pay folks more than $10/hour for their contributions. Craig > On Jun 20, 2019, at 11:36 PM, Awasum Yannick <[email protected]> wrote: > > Paying for Outreachy means we are paying for D&I. Code is a byproduct. > Given generally the bar at Outreachy is so low. > > The question now should be: is D&I really important enough for us to pay > for? I will say yes. > > Is paying for D&I a bad thing? > > Craig L Russell [email protected]
