Edit: Summary blog post is up!
Congratulations to our students for 2018! We got 9 slots this time out of 12 we were strongly considering, so there were some hard choices to make. There were also other great proposals we just couldn't dig up enough mentors for. Still I appreciate all the volunteers that allowed us to cover as much as possible For students not chosen who are still interested in working with us please read the related section below
Student/Mentor meetup next weekend
For the 9 students and all associated mentors I'd like to mark the coming weekend (April 28-29) for an initial meet-up and discussion, although I realize not everybody will be able to make it at the same time or at all. But please try to make an appearance on chat at some point during the weekend and reach out to each other within groups to start getting to know others and talk about your usual availability hours.
Each project should have a work thread here in this forum to post (at least) weekly updates in, will be given a target channel in Slack for weekly meetings, and should end up with a GitHub Project Board to track tasks. That's all somewhat flexible based on student/mentor preferences and not necessarily final yet. For instance if one group prefers meeting on Discord that's probably fine, same story for using a Trello board instead of a GitHub board.
The coming weekend is in part for figuring all that out and finalizing it. We should also start converting the proposals into smaller tasks for the project board. This is another chance to reassess scope and the order in which to implement what (but not to change the overall project)
GSOC - to break API or not to break API?
At the moment we're in a "free fire" API breaking period, as part of the development on engine v2.0.0. One hope was that we'd be able to finish before GSOC started, but the work period is now nearly upon us, and some students are likely to begin early.
Some projects may end up involving backwards-incompatible engine changes that would normally violate our API contract. Another reason for the coming weekend would be getting a better feel for which if any projects are likely to encounter that, and if so could we sort those changes out early and then release v2.0.0 mid-GSOC?
Note that API violations are at present limited to what's exposed in the engine as the "Modding API" - there are likely to be technical violations of API in a variety of modules, maybe especially Behaviors, but those aren't yet part of our "contract" and thus not subject to SemVer. We should still try to bump version numbers accordingly and be watchful for breaking code from other people, especially other student projects.
Other projects
If you were not chosen for a slot please don't feel bad - it is generally impossible to fit every promising student, and plenty don't learn about GSOC early enough to fully prepare the best possible proposal. We've started having a few students show up months in advance, becoming regular contributors before GSOC apps even open. It can be hard to compete against that in a few weeks, but many of you will have the option to try again next year. Whether it be with us or a different org it is never too early to get into open source development, most if not all orgs are happy to welcome you as regular contributors any time of year
Sometimes proposals are awesome but for whatever reason we can't fit one into a regular GSOC slot. In this case we sometimes consider if the proposal can still be used in some way. We probably won't have great mentor coverage, maybe the timeline can be spread out over a longer period of time to help that. Community projects instead of single-student projects is also a possibility, especially where multiple students applied for the same idea.
You do miss out on the official GSOC recognition (and stipend) which is hard to replace, but the learning can be much the same and ultimately far more useful. We do have our own org funds and can consider using some of those if it helps, but that gets tricky pretty quick, especially if multiple students are involved in the same effort. One thought has been to put together super swag packages instead of small stipends, as those can be given out more readily and feel more fair regardless of who did how much work.
If anybody is interested in still working with us in a semi-structured fashion like that please do let us know and we can talk about it
Edit: Oh and if any student would like feedback for why specifically a proposal was not chosen just ask. I have a rough idea for most proposals but may have to get other details from other mentors.
Congratulations to our students for 2018! We got 9 slots this time out of 12 we were strongly considering, so there were some hard choices to make. There were also other great proposals we just couldn't dig up enough mentors for. Still I appreciate all the volunteers that allowed us to cover as much as possible For students not chosen who are still interested in working with us please read the related section below
Student/Mentor meetup next weekend
For the 9 students and all associated mentors I'd like to mark the coming weekend (April 28-29) for an initial meet-up and discussion, although I realize not everybody will be able to make it at the same time or at all. But please try to make an appearance on chat at some point during the weekend and reach out to each other within groups to start getting to know others and talk about your usual availability hours.
Each project should have a work thread here in this forum to post (at least) weekly updates in, will be given a target channel in Slack for weekly meetings, and should end up with a GitHub Project Board to track tasks. That's all somewhat flexible based on student/mentor preferences and not necessarily final yet. For instance if one group prefers meeting on Discord that's probably fine, same story for using a Trello board instead of a GitHub board.
The coming weekend is in part for figuring all that out and finalizing it. We should also start converting the proposals into smaller tasks for the project board. This is another chance to reassess scope and the order in which to implement what (but not to change the overall project)
GSOC - to break API or not to break API?
At the moment we're in a "free fire" API breaking period, as part of the development on engine v2.0.0. One hope was that we'd be able to finish before GSOC started, but the work period is now nearly upon us, and some students are likely to begin early.
Some projects may end up involving backwards-incompatible engine changes that would normally violate our API contract. Another reason for the coming weekend would be getting a better feel for which if any projects are likely to encounter that, and if so could we sort those changes out early and then release v2.0.0 mid-GSOC?
Note that API violations are at present limited to what's exposed in the engine as the "Modding API" - there are likely to be technical violations of API in a variety of modules, maybe especially Behaviors, but those aren't yet part of our "contract" and thus not subject to SemVer. We should still try to bump version numbers accordingly and be watchful for breaking code from other people, especially other student projects.
Other projects
If you were not chosen for a slot please don't feel bad - it is generally impossible to fit every promising student, and plenty don't learn about GSOC early enough to fully prepare the best possible proposal. We've started having a few students show up months in advance, becoming regular contributors before GSOC apps even open. It can be hard to compete against that in a few weeks, but many of you will have the option to try again next year. Whether it be with us or a different org it is never too early to get into open source development, most if not all orgs are happy to welcome you as regular contributors any time of year
Sometimes proposals are awesome but for whatever reason we can't fit one into a regular GSOC slot. In this case we sometimes consider if the proposal can still be used in some way. We probably won't have great mentor coverage, maybe the timeline can be spread out over a longer period of time to help that. Community projects instead of single-student projects is also a possibility, especially where multiple students applied for the same idea.
You do miss out on the official GSOC recognition (and stipend) which is hard to replace, but the learning can be much the same and ultimately far more useful. We do have our own org funds and can consider using some of those if it helps, but that gets tricky pretty quick, especially if multiple students are involved in the same effort. One thought has been to put together super swag packages instead of small stipends, as those can be given out more readily and feel more fair regardless of who did how much work.
If anybody is interested in still working with us in a semi-structured fashion like that please do let us know and we can talk about it
Edit: Oh and if any student would like feedback for why specifically a proposal was not chosen just ask. I have a rough idea for most proposals but may have to get other details from other mentors.
Last edited: