Page MenuHomePhabricator

[tracking] GSoC 2015 and Outreachy 10 Weekly reports
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

Each intern needs to create a phabricator task for their weekly reports. We are officially one week into the coding period now. So the first week should be "25 May to 31 May".
A typical weekly report would contain a few bullet points about the tasks achieved during the week. It's a good practice to include links to patches/phab tickets/blog post links etc.
Examples can be found here and here.

Your weekly reports will be a major criteria during the project midterm and end-term evaluation, hence please keep them updated.

Add your weekly report task as a blocking task to this task as well as your primary project task.

Reference week dates:

25 May to 31 May
1 June to 7 June
8 June to 14 June
15 June to 21 June
22 June to 28 June
29 June to 5 July
6 July to 12 July
13 July to 19 July
20 July to 26 July
27 July to 2 August
3 August to 9 August
10 August to 16 August
17 August to 23 August

Event Timeline

Niharika raised the priority of this task from to Medium.
Niharika updated the task description. (Show Details)
Niharika moved this task to Organization on the Google-Summer-of-Code (2015) board.
Niharika subscribed.
Niharika set Security to None.
Niharika added subscribers: happy5214, Sitic, Phoenix303 and 7 others.
Aklapper renamed this task from Weekly reports tracking task to [tracking] GSoC 2015 and Outreachy 10 Weekly reports.Jun 2 2015, 1:59 PM
Aklapper added a project: Tracking-Neverending.

The main criterion should be whether the wrap-up reports worked for the interns, but personally the off-wiki format didn't work for me. I found myself not using the reports at all (nobody subscribed either).

One of the issues is that it's hard to follow changes: in fact I believe I ignore notifications, but I can't be sure because https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ is such a mess; perhaps description edits fall under "Other task activity not listed above occurs". It's obvious that wikis are a superior system for document editing, I guess phabricator was chosen just for the bug links which can be hovered; no idea how to weigh the benefits.

The main criterion should be whether the wrap-up reports worked for the interns, but personally the off-wiki format didn't work for me. I found myself not using the reports at all (nobody subscribed either).

One of the issues is that it's hard to follow changes: in fact I believe I ignore notifications, but I can't be sure because https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ is such a mess; perhaps description edits fall under "Other task activity not listed above occurs". It's obvious that wikis are a superior system for document editing, I guess phabricator was chosen just for the bug links which can be hovered; no idea how to weigh the benefits.

The reports being on Phabricator definitely made it a LOT easier for me, from an org-admin PoV to keep a constant check on them and add comments on to them if they weren't updated. I imagine it also helps because students do check comments on Phabricator as opposed to talk page comments (it takes a while getting used to the wiki-way of doing things, Phabricator is more intuitive). It's also easy because all other tasks like proposal task, evaluations and wrap-up report are on Phabricator.
If using Phabricator makes the lives of org-admins and students easier, I don't think it matters that it's not on-wiki as long as the code is in place.

As I said I agree the first criterion is whether the reports get written, but the end goal is supposedly to have them read as well. :)

Qgil subscribed.