Re: ghop

["Dr. Michael J. Chudobiak" <mjc avtechpulse com>]

Olav Vitters wrote:
> I find it a bit strange to have the Foundation pay for something like
> this. If you don't like GNOME, then you get money. If you do, then you
> should work for free?
> Same for e.g. non-sexy (gnome-love/GHOP) bugs. Someone should still pay
> attention to those.
...
> No objection if Google continues this (instead of the Foundation). Also
> wondering about the outcome of GHOP. I don't think paying for small
> things is a viable long term option (discussed many times before --
> things change when money is involved). Do e.g. the contributors stick
> around?
> Note: I understand that paying for things will get results. What I am
> interested in is the impact it has the on long term for GNOME (new
> contributors, potential bad influence caused by paying for things, etc).
> Although that is probably hard to tell atm.

Yes, I agree, we do not want a pay-for-patch mentality.

GHOP kept things very targeted (high school students only), and the 
reward minimal - 3 patches before you got any money, with an upper limit.

I think that the biggest appeal for the students was the offer of 
guidance coupled with the prestige (resumé-padding coolness) of 
competing in a Google contest (mostly the latter). I think Google or Red 
Hat could do this with offering any cash at at all. Gnome is a bit more 
obscure, so cash would help as a marketing tool. Free beer would 
probably be more popular, but there are issues with that too...

Anyway, I personally see ghop as a way to get young programmers exposed 
and interested in Gnome, rather than a source of hired-gun patches 
(although the patches certainly were useful).

I think it was very successful, and we should try to continue this or 
something similar as an outreach project to bring in new blood. Are 
there any other existing "outreach" projects in gnome?

gnome-love is great, but it relies on interested people finding us and 
getting excited on their own, serendipitously.


- Mike