2010-03-22 Christoph Noack
Comments according to the request in the Community Council Minutes#2010-03-18.
I just list my comments and will mark those, who are very important to me...
General & Introduction
- Coding opportunities in the summer --> especially in the FOSS world or in general?
- Is there some fancier naming, e.g. "OOo Summer Campus" or "Schoool of Coding" ;-)
- Can we ask the art team for a sign/symbol to establish a kind of branding for it? I hope that we will spread the news, and then things like that help a bit.
Join the "OOo Summer 2010 Internship"
- Are there any links to the previous programmes, so that people can have a look at it?
How to Apply
- Important: Email one of the members --> What is the time range for the initial contact? The terms & conditions miss that point, too.
- Concerning the "numbers are limited". From my point of view, we should provide a hint that help is appreciated any time (but not within the programme).
- How many students are able to participate during this internship? Currently it is only possible to calculate that based on the available budget.
- Is it important who the founding members are (specifically: founding, not members *g*). Why should the students contact the team directly ... and look up the names manually from the developer list? Wouldn't it be better to either directly state the names or to have a mailing list (if people want to ask in public)?
- From my point of view, "join" sounds better than "will automatically be added". But, later it is talked about mentors who may consult the Supervisory Team, although they are part of it. Maybe it would be more clear to have a Supervisory Team and Mentors.
- Important: Decide on projects --> How is this done? Are there any formal rules, e.g. a small description of why / how / ... ?
Terms & Conditions
- Important: What are the deliverables in general? Is it about code in a tested CWS, documentation, blog postings (to keep the public informed...)? It should be more clear what we expect.
- Important: "4. Accepted projects and results will be listed on the wiki" --> Do we want to state the names of the participants. Because of privacy concerns, we should make clear what we want (them?) to publish. Maybe it would be good to state in advance whether we think to work in public or closely (privately) with the mentor.
- Important: "6. At the end of the project..." --> How is the end of the project determined? Is it the end date of the internship programme? Or are there any other rules? By the way, does the evaluation refer to the "successfully finished project". I'm sure it is meant, but we should be really clear since we provide a lot of money for each project.
- Important: "6.1 ... plus formal rules" --> What rules do you think about? Again, I don't know what is expected from the participants. We ask them to work for three months full-time, so this should be clear to avoid any disappointment.
- "6.2 In case of doubt..." --> Maybe this can be formulated a bit more positive :-) Let's try "The Supervisory Team will assist both the mentor and the participant if any issues arise or if they have any questions."
- "8. Payments..." --> How are the payments made? If we require the student to own an account, we should mention that (still some people don't have one).
- What does happen if the project doesn't finish successfully - e.g. if something strange happens? Might there be a decisioin of the Supervisory Team to compensate the participants (partly?).
- Important: We should ask for a review of the ToDo list in the wiki. I'm sure there are many old items to be found ... also from the UX project ;-) So before we go public, let's ask the project leads or the project teams.
Finally, my deepest thanks to Cor for caring about the project. Please tell me if you require some help to implement the proposed changes or resolve the adressed issues!
--ChristophNoack 23:11, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Just wondering : why the Education Project, who proposes and does (since a long time) receive students, mentor and manage them for writing code, and finally simply contribute to OpenOffice.org has *not* beeing invited, nor mentionned there ?
Ericb 07:30, 11 June 2009 (UTC)