Fredrik Gustafsson <iv...@iveqy.com> writes:
>> * Break projects into smaller, easier tasks
>> - They should individually be simple, quick things if the mentor did
>> - 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
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
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.
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