Application deadline for Outreachy'11 is now over, and we need to rank and select the candidates via Outreachy application system.
The deadline for mentors to do their selection in the system = Wednesday, November 11 , 2015
Let me paste down the Gnome administrators announcement on the same:
We view this internship in a way as a fellowship, where we do not expect a certain project to be completed by the participant, but rather expect that the work will be adjusted to the level of their ability, their interests, and the project's priorities throughout the internship. We prefer not to fail people in the program as long as they stay engaged and are putting in a reasonable amount of effort. For this approach to succeed, we need to accept only the applicants who have demonstrated their enthusiasm by their actions and have shown to be quick learners. It's expected that participants will start with different levels of knowledge, but these are some of the qualities to look for.
Participants should be able to put in 40 hours a week into the internship. It's expected that people might have other part-time commitments or schedules which don't line up perfectly with December 7 to March 7 internship dates, but we have a new requirement that participants do not have full-time jobs or school during most of the duration of the internship. If the applicant is in a traditional college or university program, taking more than half of typical credits and having classes or exams for more than 6.5 weeks during the 13 weeks of the internship duration, they are not eligible to participate. Please use the new status "Contribution, full-time commitments" if such an applicant applied with your organization and made a contribution. Please feel free to ask us at email@example.com about any situations you are not sure about.
One piece of feedback we had from a few mentors in the past who found that the interns they accepted lacked needed skills is that one contribution is really not enough to conclude that the applicant will do well in the internship. It's best to accept applicants who have done multiple contributions. We did not want to change our application requirement of one contribution, because even getting things set up for one contribution requires quite a bit of work, and we want applying for the program to seem approachable. However, we encourage applicants to continue making contributions after the first one, and most promising applicants will have made multiple contributions.
To help you decide who to accept, you can ask mentors to evaluate applicants in the following ways:
applicant rating for a given project (people can use half points)
5 = amazing applicant, could become a maintainer on completing the program, made extensive contributions of high quality
4 = strong applicant, will certainly do a good job, made substantial contributions of high quality (> ~50 lines of code or equivalent)
3 = good applicant, but is somewhat inexperienced
2 = is unlikely to do a good job
1 = not a good candidate
additional free software experience indicator
Applicant doesn't need to have prior experience with your project to be evaluated with a "+" here. Instead, what this is looking at is whether the applicant has shown their enthusiasm for technology and free software and ability to get stuff done by engaging in some other technology communities and projects that are publicly documented.
+ = enthusiast based on past actions (e.g. has a blog, has been to conferences, has an active GitHub account, or contributed to free software for some time)
0 = proficient user of free software
- = no experience or very new to free software
We recommend limiting your acceptances to people who have 4/0 or above.