Summer of Code and DragonFly, 2011 wrapup

DragonFly had another good year with Google’s Summer of Code program.  We had 6 slots, and 5 passed projects. (Irinia, if you’re reading this – where did you go?)  This is our 4th year participating in Summer of Code, with I think the highest number of passed projects to date.

Here’s all the finished projects, with links to the original descriptions:

Thanks is also due to the mentors and other that helped out, via IRC and email: Aggelos Economopoulos, Alex Hornung, Joe Talbott, Matthias Schmidt, Michael Neumann, Nathaniel Filardo, Pratyush Kshirsagar, Sascha Wildner, Thomas Nikolajsen, and Venkatesh Srinivas

You can also check the Digest’s “Google Summer of Code” category for progress reports made as the summer went on.  The source code from the projects is available at the DragonFly/SOC 2011 Google Project Page.  In even better news, 2 of the projects have already been partially committed to DragonFly – Brills Peng’s  scheduler work, and Adam Hoka’s device mapper mirror project.



2 Replies to “Summer of Code and DragonFly, 2011 wrapup”

  1. I disagree, it hasn’t been a particularly good year. Almost no code was in a committable state and almost nothing has been committed. Mentors are not doing their job of merging bits and pieces, etc. There has been only one (or two?) final status reports from students.

    The only code that made it into our codebase is Brills’, but not even that is ready yet for production use. Otherwise it’s only tiny tidbits and bugfixes, no actual code has been committed.

    In other words, yes, there is code with an acceptable standard to pass gsoc evaluation – but that’s it.

    I’d very much like to see mentors cleaning up and committing as much as possible… or at least a final status report would certainly be nice so that others can do the committing, if applicable.

  2. oh, whether or not the code makes it into the project isn’t a measure of success in this case. I mean, it’s nice if it does, but we’ve had other years where very little code was committed.

    The important part is having the students participate in an open source project and work with someone else online. Having them fail because of a lack of teacher/community communication – that’s the bad thing.

Comments are closed.