I have shared a draft of my proposal for GSOC table data type. Can you please review my proposal?
Thank you very much for your proposal. We will review it until the end of this week and give you feedback for improvement.
There is enough time until April 19th to make changes then
Thank you very much for your proposal. It is a good start. The self-written motivation sounds good to me and there is big enthusiasm for open source development. However, to me this proposal is too ambitious and not very realistic. The project timeline is mostly a list of functions (many incorrectly spelled) loosely grouped by weeks. There is no explanation why this particular order is useful or how the features depend on each other. For example week 1: the function “array2table” would require the “table” class to be implemented to make sense or have any functionality. This alone I think is a task of more than a month. Therefore, I doubt that this project will be successful. More significantly, there is no proof of knowledge about Octave. Please communicate more with us. This proposal alone is not convincing for me.
How do we continue from here? I think less is far more in this project. Please familiarize what this table data type is about, what do current implementations lack of. Maybe talk with @apjanke, which portions of his tablicious project are useful to integrate into core Octave. Matlab needed years probably with a larger team of professional developers to work on those features. We know this cannot be done in a single GSoC and would love to see you working on this as a long term contributor
Thank you so much for your suggestions and reviews.
I know I went too far with project timeline but I realised now that it will take more time. I will make the necessary changes for that and I will add explanations too. And the function names I took from MATLAB because I thought I had to create identical function names.
Should I focus on other projects ideas of Octave to create a successful application for this organisation?
The issue with the function list is not, that the names must be the same as in Matlab. The spelling in the proposal is often weird, e.g.:
and a large list of functions grouped by names is copy&paste and not a project plan.
This is your decision. You can decide to improve your proposal as well and discuss with us here what can be reduced and better explained.
@Ace_D_Portgas thanks for submitting your proposal. It looks good to me. Do you have any public available codes that we get an impression of your coding skills?
Hi @siko1056 ,
No I do not have any public available codes as I am still a 2nd year student so I have not yet participated in any off campus competitive programming or hackathons. However I have completed several projects during my college course in past two years, I am planning to participate in all this stuff after this summer when my university will switch back to physical mode completely.My main objective by participating in GSocC 2022 program is to gain experience by learning how the open source software development and this community works and yes I agree I haven’t made any prior contributions in open source and GSoC 2022 will be the first platform to introduce me to this community.
Thanks for the update Sure everybody here once started with contributing to an open-source project. Your motivation is great and you will grow with the tasks given to you or you give yourself.
@siko1056 as you know tomorrow is application deadline, so please let me know if my proposal requires any minor changes.
Your proposal is fine