GSoC
is
primarialy
a
mentorship
program,
and
we
take
the
responsibilities
implied
by
that
seriously.
Towards
that
end,
here
are
some
of
the
expectations
we
have
of
our
mentors.
If
you
would
like
to
work
with
us
in
GSoC
as
a
mentor,
you
should
be
comfortable
with
these.
We've
had
very
good
experiences
here
for
our
past
several
years
participating,
and
this
is
mostly
in
the
interest
of
making
things
a
bit
more
formal
(in
the
sense
of
"official",
not
"stuffy").
-
Like
all
participants,
mentors
are
expected
to
abide
by
the
Plan
9
Code
of
Conduct
and
all
applicable
GSoC
policies.
-
All
mentors
must
read
and
agree
to
follow
the
guidelines
laid
out
in
Google's
Mentor
Guide.
-
Qualifications:
Generally
speaking,
mentors
are
expected
to
be
known
members
of
the
community
who've
demonstrated
an
ability
to
work
colaboratively
with
others,
as
well
as
a
good
command
of
the
ideas
and
technology
involved.
Note
that
mentors
sign
up
for
a
general
"pool"
at
first,
but
will
only
be
assigned
to
specific
projects
they're
interested
in
(you
are
not
expected
to
be
a
master
of
everything
in
computer
science!).
-
Mentors
are
expected
to
be
in
regular
contact
with
their
contributors.
In
this
context
"regular"
should
probably
mean
every
other
workday
or
so,
but
this
contact
needn't
be
particularly
involved.
The
objective
here
is
simply
to
ensure
the
contributor's
actively
engaged
on
an
ongoing
basis,
and
a
set
of
diffs
or
such
would
be
plenty.
The
mentor
should
feel
free
to
determine
the
form
of
this
communication,
as
long
as
it's
sufficient
to
ensure
the
contributor's
actively
engaged.
-
Mentors
may
roll
that
communication
up
into
regular,
public
updates
by
their
contributors.
If
contributors
are
posting
code
to
a
public
repository
(with
notifications)
as
often
as
they'd
otherwise
be
mailing
diffs
to
their
mentor,
that's
probably
sufficient.
-
Mentors
should
acknowledge
such
communication,
each
time,
even
if
it's
just
along
the
lines
of
"got
it,
thanks".
It
may
well
not
be
appropriate
to
do
a
detailed
review
of
each
day's
work
(actually,
most
likely
that
won't
be
appropriate
in
most
cases),
but
mentors
should
be
giving
at
least
that
level
of
positive
reinforcement
to
their
contributors.
-
While
those
actual
reviews
needn't
happen
daily,
they
must
happen,
probably
weekly
or
better.
It's
important
that
the
mentors
ensure
their
contributors
aren't
headed
off
into
the
weeds,
even
if
the
contributor
doesn't
_think_
they
have
any
questions.
-
Mentors
should,
of
course,
be
prepared
to
respond
quickly
to
actual
questions
from
their
contributors.
In
some
sense
this
is
the
main
job
of
the
mentor,
and
I
don't
believe
we've
had
any
problems
here
in
our
past
several
years
participating,
but
it's
worth
stating
explicitly.
-
Mentors
should
inform
the
project
admins
(Anthony
and
Paul)
of
any
problems
communicating
with
the
contributor,
or
indication
that
they're
not
actively
engaged,
as
soon
as
they
come
up.
We
should
never
get
to
a
point
where
an
admin
hears
"I
haven't
seen
any
work
from
my
contributor
in
two
weeks...".
In
many
cases,
just
getting
other
people
involved
can
help
the
contributor
correct
any
lapses
before
things
become
a
crisis.
-
We
will
be
requiring
regular
status
reports
from
the
contributors
to
the
mailing
list
again
this
year.
"Regular"
is
a
bit
more
vague
this
year,
given
the
more
flexible
hours
since
GSoC
2021.
Mentors
should
work
with
their
contributors
up
front
to
determine
what
makes
sense
here.
Mentors
should
make
sure
these
happen
as
agreed,
and
contact
contributors
who
miss
any
scheduled
reports
right
away.
-
Mentors
will
complete
their
midterm
and
final
evaluation
forms
on
time,
and
will
remind
their
contributors
to
do
the
same.
Any
problems
getting
their
own
forms
completed,
or
reported
or
observed
problems
from
their
contributors,
should
be
reported
to
the
organization
admins
as
soon
as
possible.
Contributors
will
also
be
assigned
a
backup
mentor
for
each
project.
The
qualifications
are
about
the
same,
but
the
expectations
are
a
different.
-
Backup
mentors
are
not
expected
to
have
the
same
level
of
day
to
day
interaction
with
their
contributors
(although
they're
certainly
welcome
to
do
so).
They
are
expected
to
follow
along
well
enough
that
they
can
pick
up
the
role
in
a
relatively
short
amount
of
time,
with
minimal
disruption
to
the
contributor,
in
the
even
that
the
primary
mentor
gets
hit
by
the
proverbial
mentor-hunting
bus.
-
When
communicating
with
the
contributor,
backup
mentors
should
keep
in
mind
that
the
primary
mentor
has
the
responsibility
to
keep
things
on
track.
If
you're
going
to
be
active
with
your
contributor,
talk
to
the
primary
mentor
first
to
make
sure
how
you're
doing
that
works
for
them.
-
If
the
backup
mentor
notices
a
lapse
in
communication,
they
should
get
in
touch
with
both
the
primary
mentor
and
the
org
admins
to
discuss
the
problem
immediately.
