[OUTREACHY] Call for mentors

[OUTREACHY] Call for mentors

[Gábor Boskovits]

Hello guix,

This is a call for mentors for the 2020-2021 Outreachy Round:

There are some ideas that were brought up earlier, for example the
list of ideas for GSoC 2020:
https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:Guix/GSoC-2020, except the network
booting project.

And the previous round proposal for creating a netlink binding for guile:
https://www.outreachy.org/outreachy-may-2020-internship-round/communities/gnu-guix/create-netlink-bindings-in-guile/cfp/

Also if you should have any new ideas feel free to start discussion
threads on the guix-devel mailing list, tagged with [OUTREACHY].

The proposal submission deadline is 24th of September. Please keep in mind that
creating a proposal that can be approved might require several
iterations, so new proposals should aim for the 17th of September, or
before, so that we have time to refine them.

You can submit your internship proposals through this link:
https://www.outreachy.org/communities/cfp/gnu-guix/

Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Best regards,
g_bor
-- 
OpenPGP Key Fingerprint: 7988:3B9F:7D6A:4DBF:3719:0367:2506:A96C:CF63:0B21

[OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[zimoun]

Dear,

The command “guix time-machine” is really cool but today it is not easy
to find the commit corresponding to one specific version.  For example,
try to install the version 1.6.8 of the package ’msmtp’.

A concrete example is described here [1].  And when reproducing
scientific papers, the versions are not always provided but instead the
dates are.  How to install the same ’msmtp’ as in 2018-12-08?


The Guix Data Service helps for such situation:

https://data.guix.gnu.org/repository/1/branch/master/package/msmtp/output-history

but its database starts on 2019-01-01 (if I have correct).  It is an
external service and will never collect data from all specifics channels
(guix-past, your-name-it, etc.).  Well, it is a good complement and all
the JSON files are under used, for example, to know if the package
builds or not.  Another story.


Today, the 2 previous use-cases are usually solved by cloning the
repository from Savannah and then by invoking Git commands.  It is not
fully satisfactory since this repository is already checked out, by
default:

~/.cache/guix/checkouts/pjmkglp4t7znuugeurpurzikxq3tnlaywmisyr27shj7apsnalwq/

Let this path affected to the environment variable $SRC. Then, to find
the 2 commits, the user can run:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ git -C $SRC --date=short --format="%h  %cd  %s" | grep msmtp
5d2b9b0749  2020-08-26  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.12.
56e1cc0c34  2020-06-10  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.11.
70ebab5aa7  2020-05-09  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.10.
b93b7b2585  2020-03-29  gnu: msmtp: Don't rely on netcat to send
queued messages.
a4fd9423b0  2019-12-30  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.7.
58da4b0a84  2019-10-02  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.6.
214cbec2cf  2019-07-16  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.5.
34e549d813  2019-07-11  gnu: msmtp: Install additional files.
06c86f166d  2019-04-29  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.4.
ce53048fb8  2019-02-14  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.3.
b8c0b9c1a3  2019-01-31  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.2.
1460e77abf  2018-12-10  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.1.
91b3a6d4db  2018-09-09  gnu: msmtp: Remove unneeded input.
37f9cfae43  2018-09-09  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.0.
1a80f1a9e3  2018-07-11  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.8.
899358d18a  2016-12-20  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.6.
d23d1ddf6e  2016-07-21  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.5.
70dced54ed  2016-05-06  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.4.
823e2ed4b3  2016-02-28  gnu: msmtp: Install msmtpq.
72d8b5baf4  2015-12-21  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.3.
4c60ce4a6b  2015-11-06  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.2.
0704788109  2015-03-19  gnu: msmtp: Use mirror:// URI.
d6e941bc95  2014-12-09  gnu: add msmtp
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---


The proposal is to implement the same result hiding all the plumbing
details, i.e.,

  guix git log --oneline | grep msmtp

Well, naming is hard. :-)  Therefore, the subcommand could have another
name (bikeshedding, bikeshedding :-)).


The next steps could be:

- take in account the channels, and maybe sort all the commits by dates
- have an --format option
- have an --grep option
- etc.

depending on the progress of the student.  IMHO, there are small
actionable steps that fit how Outreachy program works (at least how I
understand it works).


Does it make sense?
If yes, I volunteer to co-mentor, even if I am not sure to be enough
qualified to do so.  BTW, co-mentoring is good.

What do you think?


[1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix/2019-06/msg00098.html


All the best,
simon

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[Gábor Boskovits]

Thanks,

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2020. szept. 12.,
Szo, 16:00):
>
> Dear,
>
> The command “guix time-machine” is really cool but today it is not easy
> to find the commit corresponding to one specific version.  For example,
> try to install the version 1.6.8 of the package ’msmtp’.
>
> A concrete example is described here [1].  And when reproducing
> scientific papers, the versions are not always provided but instead the
> dates are.  How to install the same ’msmtp’ as in 2018-12-08?
>
>
> The Guix Data Service helps for such situation:
>
> https://data.guix.gnu.org/repository/1/branch/master/package/msmtp/output-history
>
> but its database starts on 2019-01-01 (if I have correct).  It is an
> external service and will never collect data from all specifics channels
> (guix-past, your-name-it, etc.).  Well, it is a good complement and all
> the JSON files are under used, for example, to know if the package
> builds or not.  Another story.
>
>
> Today, the 2 previous use-cases are usually solved by cloning the
> repository from Savannah and then by invoking Git commands.  It is not
> fully satisfactory since this repository is already checked out, by
> default:
>
> ~/.cache/guix/checkouts/pjmkglp4t7znuugeurpurzikxq3tnlaywmisyr27shj7apsnalwq/
>
> Let this path affected to the environment variable $SRC. Then, to find
> the 2 commits, the user can run:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> $ git -C $SRC --date=short --format="%h  %cd  %s" | grep msmtp
> 5d2b9b0749  2020-08-26  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.12.
> 56e1cc0c34  2020-06-10  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.11.
> 70ebab5aa7  2020-05-09  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.10.
> b93b7b2585  2020-03-29  gnu: msmtp: Don't rely on netcat to send
> queued messages.
> a4fd9423b0  2019-12-30  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.7.
> 58da4b0a84  2019-10-02  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.6.
> 214cbec2cf  2019-07-16  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.5.
> 34e549d813  2019-07-11  gnu: msmtp: Install additional files.
> 06c86f166d  2019-04-29  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.4.
> ce53048fb8  2019-02-14  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.3.
> b8c0b9c1a3  2019-01-31  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.2.
> 1460e77abf  2018-12-10  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.1.
> 91b3a6d4db  2018-09-09  gnu: msmtp: Remove unneeded input.
> 37f9cfae43  2018-09-09  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.8.0.
> 1a80f1a9e3  2018-07-11  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.8.
> 899358d18a  2016-12-20  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.6.
> d23d1ddf6e  2016-07-21  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.5.
> 70dced54ed  2016-05-06  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.4.
> 823e2ed4b3  2016-02-28  gnu: msmtp: Install msmtpq.
> 72d8b5baf4  2015-12-21  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.3.
> 4c60ce4a6b  2015-11-06  gnu: msmtp: Update to 1.6.2.
> 0704788109  2015-03-19  gnu: msmtp: Use mirror:// URI.
> d6e941bc95  2014-12-09  gnu: add msmtp
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
>
>
> The proposal is to implement the same result hiding all the plumbing
> details, i.e.,
>
>   guix git log --oneline | grep msmtp
>

This is very interesting. We should wait a bit for others to reply,
and evaluate if this proposal
can fill a full internship, or if it can be complemented with
something. I am all for improving user experience though.

> Well, naming is hard. :-)  Therefore, the subcommand could have another
> name (bikeshedding, bikeshedding :-)).
>
>
> The next steps could be:
>
> - take in account the channels, and maybe sort all the commits by dates
> - have an --format option
> - have an --grep option
> - etc.
>
> depending on the progress of the student.  IMHO, there are small
> actionable steps that fit how Outreachy program works (at least how I
> understand it works).
>
>
> Does it make sense?
> If yes, I volunteer to co-mentor, even if I am not sure to be enough
> qualified to do so.  BTW, co-mentoring is good.

I believe that you will make a good co-mentor, and thanks for volunteering.

>
> What do you think?
>
>
> [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-guix/2019-06/msg00098.html
>
>
> All the best,
> simon

Best regards,
g_bor

-- 
OpenPGP Key Fingerprint: 7988:3B9F:7D6A:4DBF:3719:0367:2506:A96C:CF63:0B21

[OUTREACHY] Proposal: substitutes over IPFS

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi!

Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> skribis:

> There are some ideas that were brought up earlier, for example the
> list of ideas for GSoC 2020:
> https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Group:Guix/GSoC-2020, except the network
> booting project.
>
> And the previous round proposal for creating a netlink binding for guile:
> https://www.outreachy.org/outreachy-may-2020-internship-round/communities/gnu-guix/create-netlink-bindings-in-guile/cfp/
>
> Also if you should have any new ideas feel free to start discussion
> threads on the guix-devel mailing list, tagged with [OUTREACHY].

While discussing it on IRC, the idea of turning the IPFS work into an
Outreachy came up, and I think it’s a good idea!

Technically, the work would consist in completing the prototype at
<https://issues.guix.gnu.org/33899>, which entails roughly the
following:

  • Updating (guix ipfs) to the latest IPFS HTTP API (I think IPFS no
    longer has a separate “gateway”).

  • Inserting directories as “UnixFS” instead of the custom data
    structure.

  • Finishing the ‘guix substitute’ implementation, allowing users to
    choose whether or not to use IPFS, and allowing for smooth
    integration on the main branch.

  • Testing publication/substitution in the real world, with fellow
    hackers.

  • (Optional.) Try and use IPFS for long-term source tarball
    archival.

Perhaps Pierre (Cc’d) has more ideas on this.

I prefer not to volunteer to mentor it, but I’m happy to contribute to
discussions and code review.

Who’d be willing to mentor it?

Anyhow, if we do it, we should advertise it widely and early!

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[zimoun]

Dear Gábor,

On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 17:18, Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> wrote:

> > The proposal is to implement the same result hiding all the plumbing
> > details, i.e.,
> >
> >   guix git log --oneline | grep msmtp
> >
>
> This is very interesting. We should wait a bit for others to reply,
> and evaluate if this proposal
> can fill a full internship, or if it can be complemented with
> something. I am all for improving user experience though.

Well, let's do the proposal if it is fine.  At least, the idea will be
written down. :-)
Could you indicate to me how to proceed?  What should I have to write?

And I volunteer for co-mentoring (or mentoring if no one is interested).

All the best,
simon

Re: [OUTREACHY] Proposal: substitutes over IPFS

[Pierre Neidhardt]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1196 bytes --]

Hi!

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> While discussing it on IRC, the idea of turning the IPFS work into an
> Outreachy came up, and I think it’s a good idea!
>
> Technically, the work would consist in completing the prototype at
> <https://issues.guix.gnu.org/33899>, which entails roughly the
> following:
>
>   • Updating (guix ipfs) to the latest IPFS HTTP API (I think IPFS no
>     longer has a separate “gateway”).
>
>   • Inserting directories as “UnixFS” instead of the custom data
>     structure.
>
>   • Finishing the ‘guix substitute’ implementation, allowing users to
>     choose whether or not to use IPFS, and allowing for smooth
>     integration on the main branch.
>
>   • Testing publication/substitution in the real world, with fellow
>     hackers.
>
>   • (Optional.) Try and use IPFS for long-term source tarball
>     archival.
>
> Perhaps Pierre (Cc’d) has more ideas on this.

Looking good!

> Who’d be willing to mentor it?

Sorry, I won't have time to commit for this, but I'd be happy to
contribute to the discussion (and testing!).

Cheers!

-- 
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 511 bytes --]

Re: [OUTREACHY] Proposal: substitutes over IPFS

[Konrad Hinsen]

Hi Ludo,

> I prefer not to volunteer to mentor it, but I’m happy to contribute to
> discussions and code review.
>
> Who’d be willing to mentor it?

I don't know what exactly that implies, so all I say for now is that I'd
be happy to participate in this project. I know the IPFS side rather
well, but have only a user-level knowledge of how Guix handles
substitutes.

Does Outreachy call for a single mentor, or can it be a team?

Konrad.

Re: [OUTREACHY] Proposal: substitutes over IPFS

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen@fastmail.net> writes:

> Does Outreachy call for a single mentor, or can it be a team?

There can be several co-mentors – we also did that for past projects.
It’s a good idea, but good, regular communication is essential to make
it work.

-- 
Ricardo

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[Ricardo Wurmus]

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> Dear Gábor,
>
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 17:18, Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > The proposal is to implement the same result hiding all the plumbing
>> > details, i.e.,
>> >
>> >   guix git log --oneline | grep msmtp
>> >
>>
>> This is very interesting. We should wait a bit for others to reply,
>> and evaluate if this proposal
>> can fill a full internship, or if it can be complemented with
>> something. I am all for improving user experience though.
>
> Well, let's do the proposal if it is fine.  At least, the idea will be
> written down. :-)
> Could you indicate to me how to proceed?  What should I have to write?

On the Outreachy website you need to get an account in order to request
to become a (co-)mentor.  The “community managers” (I think this
includes me) then approve that.

At this point you can write the proposal on the Outreachy website.  This
will again need to be approved in the end.  We need to have a written
proposal in the Outreachy system before the next round begins.
Outreachy is a bit stricter in that regard than GSoC where it’s
sufficient to have a vague project idea on some website.  This is
generally a good thing, because it facilitates more successful projects
with fewer sub-projects that nobody ever thought through (which is a bad
thing to discover one third into the internship).

-- 
Ricardo

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[zimoun]

Thank you for explaining.

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 17:23, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:

> >> > The proposal is to implement the same result hiding all the plumbing
> >> > details, i.e.,
> >> >
> >> >   guix git log --oneline | grep msmtp

> On the Outreachy website you need to get an account in order to request
> to become a (co-)mentor.  The “community managers” (I think this
> includes me) then approve that.

Do you think the proposal is a good one for an Outreachy project?


> At this point you can write the proposal on the Outreachy website.  This
> will again need to be approved in the end.  We need to have a written
> proposal in the Outreachy system before the next round begins.
> Outreachy is a bit stricter in that regard than GSoC where it’s
> sufficient to have a vague project idea on some website.  This is
> generally a good thing, because it facilitates more successful projects
> with fewer sub-projects that nobody ever thought through (which is a bad
> thing to discover one third into the internship).

Is this again approvement done by the "community managers" or by another board?

Cheers,
simon

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[Ricardo Wurmus]

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> Thank you for explaining.
>
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 17:23, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
>
>> >> > The proposal is to implement the same result hiding all the plumbing
>> >> > details, i.e.,
>> >> >
>> >> >   guix git log --oneline | grep msmtp
>
>> On the Outreachy website you need to get an account in order to request
>> to become a (co-)mentor.  The “community managers” (I think this
>> includes me) then approve that.
>
> Do you think the proposal is a good one for an Outreachy project?

Yes!  I suggested on IRC that we should do the IPFS project as part of
Outreachy to encourage implementation of the missing pieces.

>> At this point you can write the proposal on the Outreachy website.  This
>> will again need to be approved in the end.  We need to have a written
>> proposal in the Outreachy system before the next round begins.
>> Outreachy is a bit stricter in that regard than GSoC where it’s
>> sufficient to have a vague project idea on some website.  This is
>> generally a good thing, because it facilitates more successful projects
>> with fewer sub-projects that nobody ever thought through (which is a bad
>> thing to discover one third into the internship).
>
> Is this again approvement done by the "community managers" or by another board?

Yes.  The idea is that there will be a large number of proposals but
only enough funding for one or two interns.  IIRC internship candidates
then pick a project they’d like to work on and eventually we decide
together with the mentors whom to accept for the internships.  So it
could be that there will only be one suitable internship candidate who
picked another project — in that case the IPFS project would not go
forward as an Outreachy internship.  If we’re lucky, though, we’ll get
enough suitable candidates so that all proposed projects can go forward.

-- 
Ricardo

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[zimoun]

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 19:21, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:

> Yes.  The idea is that there will be a large number of proposals but
> only enough funding for one or two interns.  IIRC internship candidates
> then pick a project they’d like to work on and eventually we decide
> together with the mentors whom to accept for the internships.  So it
> could be that there will only be one suitable internship candidate who
> picked another project — in that case the IPFS project would not go
> forward as an Outreachy internship.  If we’re lucky, though, we’ll get
> enough suitable candidates so that all proposed projects can go forward.

I committed something.
Well, the GNU Guix has one intern founded for this round, if I read
correctly.  Obviously, I can withdraw the proposal if it can help IPFS
to reach master.

Cheers,
simon

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[Ricardo Wurmus]

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 19:21, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
>
>> Yes.  The idea is that there will be a large number of proposals but
>> only enough funding for one or two interns.  IIRC internship candidates
>> then pick a project they’d like to work on and eventually we decide
>> together with the mentors whom to accept for the internships.  So it
>> could be that there will only be one suitable internship candidate who
>> picked another project — in that case the IPFS project would not go
>> forward as an Outreachy internship.  If we’re lucky, though, we’ll get
>> enough suitable candidates so that all proposed projects can go forward.
>
> I committed something.

Thank you, I’ll try to read it tomorrow.

> Well, the GNU Guix has one intern founded for this round, if I read
> correctly.  Obviously, I can withdraw the proposal if it can help IPFS
> to reach master.

There is the possibility to get extra funding from Outreachy when there
are more suitable candidates than funded projects.  It’s an exceptional
case, but you won’t have to withdraw proposals.  In the worst case we
can carry the proposal to the next round of internships.

-- 
Ricardo

Re: [OUTREACHY] Proposal: substitutes over IPFS

[Gábor Boskovits]

Hello Konrad,

Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hinsen@fastmail.net> ezt írta (időpont: 2020.
szept. 16., Sze, 16:28):
>
> Hi Ludo,
>
> > I prefer not to volunteer to mentor it, but I’m happy to contribute to
> > discussions and code review.
> >
> > Who’d be willing to mentor it?
>
> I don't know what exactly that implies, so all I say for now is that I'd
> be happy to participate in this project. I know the IPFS side rather
> well, but have only a user-level knowledge of how Guix handles
> substitutes.
>
> Does Outreachy call for a single mentor, or can it be a team?

I believe it is better if  it's a team. How it worked in the past was
that we usually designated one person to be the primary mentor,
and have others help out when they were unavailable. Also we usually
had one hour weekly where there was live discussion,
where all the mentors were participating. Outreachy asks for a 5 hour
per week commitment from the team per intern.
Usually there are peeks when this can be more, but there are periods
when this is just too much. It all boils down to good communication
though.
I would be happy to co-mentor this, although I do not have too much
hands on knowledge about substitute handling code either.

>
> Konrad.

Best regards,
g_bor

-- 
OpenPGP Key Fingerprint: 7988:3B9F:7D6A:4DBF:3719:0367:2506:A96C:CF63:0B21

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[Gábor Boskovits]

Hello,

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> ezt írta (időpont: 2020. szept.
16., Sze, 20:44):
>
>
> zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 19:21, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes.  The idea is that there will be a large number of proposals but
> >> only enough funding for one or two interns.  IIRC internship candidates
> >> then pick a project they’d like to work on and eventually we decide
> >> together with the mentors whom to accept for the internships.  So it
> >> could be that there will only be one suitable internship candidate who
> >> picked another project — in that case the IPFS project would not go
> >> forward as an Outreachy internship.  If we’re lucky, though, we’ll get
> >> enough suitable candidates so that all proposed projects can go forward.
> >
> > I committed something.

I have read the proposal. All in all it looks good to me. One section
that could be
improved is the requirement on the setup. We usually state having guix
installed as
a requirement, even maybe a development setup. As initial contribution
we usually
ask for packaging something simple. We should also have a look at the community
details, like the communication channels, and try to uniformize them
across the proposals.
I will check how it was phrased in the past, see if there is any new
info now, and try to
come up with something.

>
> Thank you, I’ll try to read it tomorrow.
>
> > Well, the GNU Guix has one intern founded for this round, if I read
> > correctly.  Obviously, I can withdraw the proposal if it can help IPFS
> > to reach master.
>
> There is the possibility to get extra funding from Outreachy when there
> are more suitable candidates than funded projects.  It’s an exceptional
> case, but you won’t have to withdraw proposals.  In the worst case we
> can carry the proposal to the next round of internships.
>
> --
> Ricardo

Best regards,
g_bor
-- 
OpenPGP Key Fingerprint: 7988:3B9F:7D6A:4DBF:3719:0367:2506:A96C:CF63:0B21

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[zimoun]

Hi Gábor,

On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 at 10:12, Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have read the proposal. All in all it looks good to me. One section
> that could be
> improved is the requirement on the setup. We usually state having guix
> installed as
> a requirement, even maybe a development setup. As initial contribution
> we usually
> ask for packaging something simple. We should also have a look at the community
> details, like the communication channels, and try to uniformize them
> across the proposals.
> I will check how it was phrased in the past, see if there is any new
> info now, and try to
> come up with something.

Thank you.
Do you know if the past submissions have been publicly archived somewhere?


Cheers,
simon

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[Gábor Boskovits]

Hello,

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2020. szept. 17.,
Cs, 12:01):
>
> Hi Gábor,
>
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 at 10:12, Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have read the proposal. All in all it looks good to me. One section
> > that could be
> > improved is the requirement on the setup. We usually state having guix
> > installed as
> > a requirement, even maybe a development setup. As initial contribution
> > we usually
> > ask for packaging something simple. We should also have a look at the community
> > details, like the communication channels, and try to uniformize them
> > across the proposals.
> > I will check how it was phrased in the past, see if there is any new
> > info now, and try to
> > come up with something.
>
> Thank you.
> Do you know if the past submissions have been publicly archived somewhere?

I am not sure if these are available publicly, but you should be able
to see this for example:
https://www.outreachy.org/outreachy-may-2020-internship-round/communities/gnu-guix/create-netlink-bindings-in-guile/cfp/
>
>
> Cheers,
> simon

Best regards,
g_bor


-- 
OpenPGP Key Fingerprint: 7988:3B9F:7D6A:4DBF:3719:0367:2506:A96C:CF63:0B21

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[zimoun]

On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 at 13:16, Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Do you know if the past submissions have been publicly archived somewhere?
>
> I am not sure if these are available publicly, but you should be able
> to see this for example:
> https://www.outreachy.org/outreachy-may-2020-internship-round/communities/gnu-guix/create-netlink-bindings-in-guile/cfp/

Seeing nothing, just the title.

Cheers,
simon

Re: [OUTREACHY] toward a proposal?

[Gábor Boskovits]

Helllo,

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2020. szept. 17.,
Cs, 13:26):
>
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 at 13:16, Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Do you know if the past submissions have been publicly archived somewhere?
> >
> > I am not sure if these are available publicly, but you should be able
> > to see this for example:
> > https://www.outreachy.org/outreachy-may-2020-internship-round/communities/gnu-guix/create-netlink-bindings-in-guile/cfp/
>
> Seeing nothing, just the title.

Even when you are logged in to outreachy?
That is strange....

I will copy it then to somewhere in maintenance later...

>
> Cheers,
> simon


Regards,
g_bor
-- 
OpenPGP Key Fingerprint: 7988:3B9F:7D6A:4DBF:3719:0367:2506:A96C:CF63:0B21

Re: [OUTREACHY] Proposal: substitutes over IPFS

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello!

Gábor Boskovits <boskovits@gmail.com> skribis:

> I believe it is better if  it's a team.

Agreed.  Looks like we almost have a team for this proposal now,
thanks.  :-)

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:

> There can be several co-mentors – we also did that for past projects.
> It’s a good idea, but good, regular communication is essential to make
> it work.

+1.  There are two aspects here: one is to have regular and informal
communication between the mentors and the intern so that the intern
feels at ease and dares ask questions or share concerns before it’s too
late, and the second aspect is to have a large part of that happening on
public channels.  I think that helps interns become “first-class
contributors” and since it’s an outreach effort, it also shows to others
following along how we help onboard people from different backgrounds
and origins.

Thanks,
Ludo’.