Fredrik Gustafsson <iv...@iveqy.com> writes: >> >> * Break projects into smaller, easier tasks >> - They should individually be simple, quick things if the mentor did >> them. >> - Should be parallelizable so students don't have to block on reviews. > > I'd 5-6 smaller projects setup for the summer, I think I managed to do > 2-3 of them. (I did however do everything I applied for). I really think > it's an excellent idea. This also meant that while one patch waited for > review, I'd other things to work on.
Lots of kudo points for Jens and Heiko :-) >> * Mentoring improvements: >> - Always have a co-mentor >> - Focus on social aspects (who to Cc, etc.) >> - Nominate separate "review mentors" to ensure fast review cycles > > I like the idea of review mentors. However bear in mind that you'll > already have three people reviewing the patches (two mentors and Junio). > We will not make it look like it's impossible to get things into > git.git. I think the idea was not that you'd get *more* reviews, but that there would be a group of volunteers doing reviews to ensure that they arrive fast. Students should have feedback within 1-2 days of the series being posted. The other advantages are that it provides a set of fresh eyes, and takes load off Junio. I'm not even sure how official we have to make this. In Thomas Gummerer's case, Michael stepped up with reviews when I couldn't. So maybe it'll again "just work out". But I would like to take this role, and leave the "social" mentoring to others. -- Thomas Rast t...@thomasrast.ch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
