From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E021F4CE for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 20:34:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233769AbiDHUgT (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2022 16:36:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33868 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232768AbiDHUgS (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2022 16:36:18 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-x82c.google.com (mail-qt1-x82c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB8C31FA72 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 13:34:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x82c.google.com with SMTP id a11so11529401qtb.12 for ; Fri, 08 Apr 2022 13:34:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Ft6wh0N9L6KGWI6do47zZrLzNLLJFnidCCl4C6C9ER0=; b=cz44fveCqYxcqQ3sjxJIFu9FTvCvX8Jrn0bbXB0zyu4PnCqjzZmanBDlxQkfMeaXAg OWgiTSZXTRWM3kh8F0clSlcXNcd5dd5shIgrL1Xg1jMJngZM1hMMw//sh/u84RFxRENU A/VcanCmE5hjzm/WIH0UhuyTOocvRAVcaoeqybMo6gb5zi2LG1GyQya5HveXBWmn3k7H L3dBl+qa6R/0wrSO9+xsOfbiFuOtb8BiX06okHniqfjdhEN6307GO5FZsmSCTEeBccpi 3PZ0MV9sXmXrfsykZOTESjIVaiicn+Sk3NwvKlj+gshcrTRCPv1xh3C+/0bWzTgSm1mw WEVA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Ft6wh0N9L6KGWI6do47zZrLzNLLJFnidCCl4C6C9ER0=; b=3heWoaI/Wjsd4fsAVnbEbVl+FkyhJQg8gXvoTeXjvFG4DdTxS2cW8Sen+QwBbwBpju BeSPseyYH4dBmTXuAbkAqQIsU23V9zKpWahgXXolyYihrmWH3TVTmCilEYZit05Gys8f 5vwpNz9k643WW/enDKrfcXgQZ5k1yScPlJ11WQAFmSZG/ME18UKp7GJudQloQy2wPEXW m+RJbxidJVZ9c9YSHpoeJCVufqUGWS4KZWCh4MHJ8LC06oByqqlTmAeA4WfaI+bglSwq kSVRzpiWOhZUyCKQ4eL8HAJetD9SL59OcFIe7qrV816rNZukubDNmpPZhNIFik2q0AQn MICw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530fLpVkGAPO8q+G67oCSrqZwYnM+9+1xVwxOHrHaf5fJobcW0pk BB/nCx/cqWKONfbcVyUVG7M9Zg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz4l7knYlHn8+DyAGUw863ZIASgYJlFuzbP7wlhX75ASGRul59LDBx/sWTacJM7S/uEojYKRg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:82:b0:2e1:d61d:81ec with SMTP id o2-20020a05622a008200b002e1d61d81ecmr17530567qtw.674.1649450052938; Fri, 08 Apr 2022 13:34:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 3-20020a370503000000b0067b03f03589sm14195960qkf.53.2022.04.08.13.34.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 08 Apr 2022 13:34:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 16:34:11 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: Christian Couder Cc: Kaartic Sivaraam , Plato Kiorpelidis , git , Shubham Mishra , Christian Couder Subject: Re: [GSoC] Contributor candidate introduction Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 09:16:44AM +0200, Christian Couder wrote: > > > That said, if we do end up splitting the bitmaps GSoC project in two, > > > when would we need to do it by? > > > > To the best of my knowledge, Google does not require the proposal ideas to > > be laid out by organization before the proposal deadline (which is April 19). > > This gives the flexibility for mentors and GSoC contributors to collaborate > > and come up with a project ideas that are not present in the initial ideas > > list and write proposals for them. > > I agree with this, but please keep in mind that in > https://git.github.io/General-Application-Information/ we ask > applicants to "Discuss their project by posting drafts of their > application on the mailing-list long before the deadline." So > splitting the bitmap project should be done soon, so that applicants > have time to prepare and discuss their proposals based on the splitted > project. I've thought a little bit more about this, and I think we should leave the project in one piece (i.e., avoid splitting it up). My thinking is roughly that of the sub-projects listed: - investigate replacing EWAH with Roaring+Run - add a "table of contents" to the .bitmap file - append-only bitmap generation - amorphous / larger related projects ...the first two both require serious (re-)consideration of the .bitmap format, and I don't think it's possible to split that up among multiple GSoC projects. The "append-only" project is interesting, but probably not large enough for a GSoC student to occupy their time with completely. I think the last bullet point has the opposite problem, which is that there is _too_ much to do there, and that it isn't well defined enough. So we _could_ split the two projects up, having one work on any preliminary format changes, and the other stay busy with a smaller bitmap project, but I have significant concerns about that setup being successful. Instead, let's keep the project as-is, and have the accepted student focus on one of the first two bullet points, taking into account that we'll first want to spend some time thinking about whether or not the current .bitmap format is appropriate given the proposed changes. Thanks, Taylor