From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20120316193646.GA2789@polynum.com> Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 15:39:52 -0700 Message-ID: From: Joseph Stewart To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0023544713ecc58cb504bb8c1e6a Subject: Re: [9fans] Plan 9 rejected from GSoC 2012 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 6a7d7ec8-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --0023544713ecc58cb504bb8c1e6a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I guess I didn't realize there was pay involved. How about a kick-starter approach? Think it'd work? On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 3:20 PM, John Floren wrote: > I think being able to pay the students is what really makes GSoC work. > It adds an additional dimension that makes it a lot harder to just > say, "Oh, I'm bored with this, I quit". > > John > > On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Joseph Stewart > wrote: > > So this all makes me wonder why some social aggregation group (aka stack > > overflow or reddit/programming) or even just a big group of decentralized > > nerds couldn't just do a variant of GSoC on our own. > > > > Lining up mentors and mentees particularly w/o big biz or school backing > is > > kinda what open source is all about. > > > > I guess what I'm saying is "could we do this on our own"? Maybe not > having > > Google behind the effort takes some of the air out of it... but maybe > not? > > > > -j > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 1:35 PM, erik quanstrom > > wrote: > >> > >> On Sun Mar 18 16:32:12 EDT 2012, rminnich@gmail.com wrote: > >> > coreboot got rejected too and we had 5 years in a row. Don't feel bad. > >> > I think they're trying to make sure that they don't get the same > >> > players year after year, which is a good idea IMHO. > >> > > >> > >> thanks, ron. that's reason enough to try again next year. > >> > >> - erik > >> > > > > --0023544713ecc58cb504bb8c1e6a Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I guess I didn't realize there was pay involved. How about a kick-start= er approach? Think it'd work?

On Sun,= Mar 18, 2012 at 3:20 PM, John Floren <john@jfloren.net> wrote:
I think being able to pay the students is wh= at really makes GSoC work.
It adds an additional dimension that makes it a lot harder to just
say, "Oh, I'm bored with this, I quit".

John

On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Joseph Stewart
<joseph.stewart@gmail.com> wrote:
> So this all makes me wonder why some social=A0aggregation group (aka s= tack
> overflow or reddit/programming) or even just a big group of decentrali= zed
> nerds couldn't just do a variant of GSoC on our own.
>
> Lining up mentors and mentees particularly w/o big biz or school backi= ng is
> kinda what open source is all about.
>
> I guess what I'm saying is "could we do this on our own"= ? Maybe not having
> Google behind the effort takes some of the air out of it... but maybe = not?
>
> -j
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 1:35 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun Mar 18 16:32:12 EDT 2012, rminnich@gmail.com wrote:
>> > coreboot got rejected too and we had 5 years in a row. Don= 9;t feel bad.
>> > I think they're trying to make sure that they don't g= et the same
>> > players year after year, which is a good idea IMHO.
>> >
>>
>> thanks, ron. =A0that's reason enough to try again next year. >>
>> - erik
>>
>


--0023544713ecc58cb504bb8c1e6a--