Re: [gentoo-soc] Some project ideas

[Antoine Pinsard <antoine.pinsard@dichotomies.fr>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2659 bytes --]

Hi,

There is no problem for late answer. I've been busy last week too. I
will take the time to choose a project and also wait for more project
ideas. I saw there is also a project about "Kernel Configuration" which
is a subject I am very interested in currently. I am working on my
kernel configuration for two months, trying to understand each setting
and enable only what I need. However I'm still a beginner and I don't
know if I would be able to work on such a tool.

On Sat, 2013-03-09 at 11:40 -0800, Brian Dolbec wrote:

> On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 23:44 +0100, Antoine Pinsard wrote:
> > Hi again,
> > 
> > I have two more project ideas and wonder if they are good ones and if
> > they fit well the summer of code.
> > 
> > The first one came from this discussion on Gentoo-Chat:
> > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-951096.html
> > 
> > According to some users (well, actually one for the time being), some
> > portage tools "are out of date or do not completely fulfill the
> > requirements of users" (last message of the first page).
> > 
> > The idea is thus to fetch these tools and put them into two lists: those
> > which need a few fixes and those which are better to be fully rewritten.
> > Then evaluate which ones can be done while the summer of code.
> > 
> > Do you think it could be a good subject?
> 
> 
> First sorry it's taken so long to respond. I've been quite busy, plus I
> wasn't sure how to best reply...
> 
> Well, I know that we would like to re-write euse into python from bash.
> By doing that euse could use the portage api calls to get better, more
> consistent/current data to provide the users.  It could also speed up
> it's operation over the bash version (minor point).  It would make it
> easier to maintain as changes in operation on those files, accessing the
> data about the flags, etc. change, the api calls are likely to not
> change.  That would make many changes automatically available, used
> without needing to update the code.  An euse re-write in python using
> the portage api would also allow for more options/features to be easily
> added.
> 
> However I don't think that an euse re-write would be enough for gsoc
> project.  There are other tools in gentoolkit that could use more
> updates, but for the most part are not extensive.  
> 
> I've cc'd the tools-portage alias so that we can all particiapte in any
> further inquiries about gentoolkit and other tools-portage packages that
> we maintain.
> 
> For a well motivated student we may be able to come up with enough work
> suitable for a gsoc project.
> 
> > Thanks
> 
> 
> 



[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3000 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]