Subject: Re: [boost] [GSoC] Proposal reviewing
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-04-11 12:06:59
On 09/04/2011 20:05, Andrew Sutton wrote:
> Here's how this should work:
> 1. Identify the set of proposals for projects that you are interested
> in mentoring.
> 2. Evaluate the proposal and write your evaluation as a PRIVATE comment.
> 3. If you have questions of the student, you can write PUBLIC comments
> or send them an email.
> 4. Rank the proposal (I think 5 is the best this year). That would be
> the project that you want to mentor.
I've started ranking some bad proposals as a 1, since they removed the
negative point system.
I was told by the GSoC folks that we should use the average score to
rank proposals rather than the cumulative one.
> At the end of the week, you should have a list of 1 or 2 proposals
> that *you yourself* will mentor. If you are not offering to mentor the
> project, please don't review it as a 5. Otherwise, we end up with a
> case where we have to assign a mentor to a project that they aren't
> interested in. I don't think that this has worked out very well in the
Why is that scheme necessary? The score and the list of possible mentors
are separate things.
We could just select the top 10 projects with the highest average that
have at least one mentor assigned to them, resolving the cases where the
same mentor is assigned multiple times manually.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk