On 2013-03-12 09:45, Charles Plessy wrote:
I have a question: could you comment on the differences,
complementarity, or
overlap between such an internship and the NM process, which already
has
extensive questions about packaging. My personal experience is that
when I
went through the NM proces
Le Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 08:07:40PM +0300, Moray Allan a écrit :
>
> Nevertheless, I think it would be useful for us to have some wider
> kind of internship scheme, for the huge proportion of Debian
> activity that definitely will not fit under the current GSoC rules.
Hi Moray,
I have a question:
On 2013-03-11 23:26, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Note that I did not comment (or "ignored", as you put it) on some
points
in your reply only because I agreed with them.
(Thank you for clarifying; I didn't detect agreement from your reply.)
Still, given that GSoC exists, I find it useful to explore
On 11/03/13 at 22:41 +0300, Moray Allan wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 22:14, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >We can try to second-guess Google's motivations for excluding
> >documentation to determine if it also applies to packaging, or we can
> >just ask, which I have done:
> >
> >https://groups.google.com/foru
On 2013-03-11 22:14, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
We can try to second-guess Google's motivations for excluding
documentation to determine if it also applies to packaging, or we can
just ask, which I have done:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups=#!topic/google-summer-of-code-discuss/X9Um
On 11/03/13 at 20:14 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> We can try to second-guess Google's motivations for excluding
> documentation to determine if it also applies to packaging, or we can
> just ask, which I have done:
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups=#!topic/google-summer-of-code-
On 11/03/13 at 20:07 +0300, Moray Allan wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 19:44, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >I see. Interesting. But in
> >https://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2013/03/msg00012.html, the
> >"no
> >packaging work" rule seems to come from the Debian GSoC team, and at
> >least Sylvestre seems ope
On 2013-03-11 19:44, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I see. Interesting. But in
https://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2013/03/msg00012.html, the
"no
packaging work" rule seems to come from the Debian GSoC team, and at
least Sylvestre seems open to modifying it.
It "comes from" from how they have unde
On 11/03/13 at 19:28 +0300, Moray Allan wrote:
> On 2013-03-11 18:42, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >In your platform, you give that specific idea:
> >
> >I am not sure how it would differ from GSoC? What different
> >problem will
> >this solve?
>
> Apart from the obvious differences of control etc., GS
On 2013-03-11 18:42, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Also, we often have problems finding ideas for GSoC.
Oh, and I forgot to say here:
This year's deadline for GSoC project ideas is only a week away, on
Monday 18 March.
I very much encourage everyone reading to think hard about ideas and
add new pr
On 2013-03-11 18:42, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
In your platform, you give that specific idea:
I am not sure how it would differ from GSoC? What different problem
will
this solve?
Apart from the obvious differences of control etc., GSoC is
fundamentally about writing a significant piece of code.
Hi Moray,
In your platform, you give that specific idea:
Besides the great work of debian-mentors/mentors.debian.net, it might
be good to provide more ways to learn about how to contribute to
Debian. One possibility would be to encourage teams to take interns,
perhaps for a summer
12 matches
Mail list logo
