Here are some additional thoughts on where we go from here. The Outreachy program is one of three initiatives that the D&I committee originally asked the board to fund for this year. The other two are proceeding apace.
The Outreachy program is an experiment, and we do not know nor can we know up front what the results will be. We might find significant barriers to entry to contributing to Apache communities that are faced by under-represented people. We will then need to decide how or if or how quickly to lower these barriers. We might find that Outreachy graduates continue to contribute to Apache projects. We might find that Outreachy graduates recruit other people to apply to Outreachy for mentorships. We might decide that funding Outreachy on a continuing basis is in the best interests of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose. We might find that Outreachy gives us no information that we didn't know already. We might find it difficult or impossible to find Apache communities who are willing and able to provide mentors for Outreachy applicants. Craig > On Jun 28, 2019, at 9:48 PM, Craig Russell <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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] >> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]> > Craig L Russell [email protected]
