[haiku-development] Re: GSOC 2012

  • From: anil kag <anilkagak2@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:13:55 +0530

Thanks  Mr. Stephan for further clarification, now i have understood the
point "I was not well prepared with my proposal" & "I did not communicated
well to clarify any further queries"... :)

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Stephan Aßmus <superstippi@xxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 24.04.2012 01:02, anil kag wrote:
>
>> *Crucial part:*
>>
>> Now i understand why i was not selected??
>>
>
> The reason is very simple. We had several proposals for the IMAP-FS
> project, but none of them were convincing. The IMAP-FS is quite a
> challenging project. There has been a very long discussion on this mailing
> list quite some time ago, about all the problems and challenges with this
> idea. None of the proposals showed that any substantial research into those
> problems was done.
>
> If I think *shortly* about IMAP-FS, I know it has to sync with the server,
> provide local caching, fetch headers and so on. Those are the obvious, user
> visible features. In a convincing GSoC proposal however, I have to dig in a
> lot deeper, anticipate potential problems and try to envision their
> potential solutions. I can't just "assume" that I will "somehow" solve
> "anything" that may come up.
>
> Some of the GSoC proposals that we accepted this year were also not
> "convincing" at first. But those students then provided details in the
> communication following their proposal, or improved their proposal with the
> results of that communication.
>
> I hope this provides some insights into why your project was not selected.
> I can fully understand that it may be hard to allocate as much time to GSoC
> between exams and all, as would be necessary. As organization, Haiku
> however has to work with what is there, in the proposals and in the
> communication. You *may* have succeeded with your project, but from the
> information available to us, we were not convinced it was very likely. If
> you participate again, make sure your proposal and communication
> *convinces* that you have done the necessary research into implementation
> details of your project.
>
> Best regards,
> -Stephan
>
>

Other related posts: