[gentoo-soc] Some project ideas

[gentoo-soc] Some project ideas

[Antoine Pinsard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1613 bytes --]

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portage tools "are out of date or do not completely fulfill the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?

I do also have another project idea, but I think it rolls a bit away
from Gentoo's scope.

I noticed that the documentation is a step that is often omitted or
botched by developers. However this is a very important step, especially
in open source development. So, the idea is to set up a platform (a
website) that 1) somehow encourages documentation writing and 2) gather
people that have documentation (or translation) skills (and enjoy doing
it) to document other's piece of code. Of course it will require that
the code is already well-written and enough documented. But the goal is
to provide out-of-code documentations for both developers and users so
that more pieces of open source code could be used and improved by more
people.

I tried to sum up the idea without giving too much details. I'd mainly
like to know whether it could be a good project or not (and I am a bit
doubtful about that).

Thanks

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

Re: [gentoo-soc] Some project ideas

[Brian Dolbec]

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 portage tools "are out of date or do not completely fulfill the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

Re: [gentoo-soc] Some project ideas

[Pavlos Ratis]

It would be great to have these ideas in our wiki page:
http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code/2013
There is no need add yourself in the contacts, but you can document
them (3-4 lines).

On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Brian Dolbec <dolsen@gentoo.org> 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
>
>
>

Re: [gentoo-soc] Some project ideas

[Antoine Pinsard]

[-- 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 --]