Brett Cannon writes:
> There was never a formal one to my knowledge. Part of the problem is that
> the PSF acted as a blanket organization this year so we just basically
> helped dole out slots to various Python projects. This meant it was not
> under very centralized control and thus not easy to track.
I don't think you need "centralization" or "control"; the Python
mentors are all public spirited and responsible folks, right? It's
just that report-writing is kind of unrewarding work, especially if
you don't know what the report is supposed to be like (and haven't
even been asked for them!)
Why not have a wiki page for reports, and hand out a T-shirt or
something like that to *mentors* who file their reports? Somebody at
the PSF should sit down, think about what the report really needs to
say from their point of view, and buy a pizza (as well as the
T-shirt!) for somebody trusted to write a good but *minimal* report.
Then point to that: "Here's the quality of prose and citation you need
to aspire to, here's the minimum length and content you *must* include."
Report-writing of this kind is for the *mentors*: you want to know who
supervises well, and eventually do meta-mentoring. Of course the
participants should be writing reports too, but this page should link
to those reports. You'll get them; the mentor's T-shirt ("Somebody
participated in the Summer of Code and all I got is this lousy
T-shirt") is at stake!
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4