[Owasp-board] OWASP Summer Code Sprint Proposal

johanna curiel curiel johanna.curiel at owasp.org
Tue Apr 7 14:24:01 UTC 2015


5) Finally, the org team in conjunction with the project mentors team then
decide how many slots each project will get.

I think , in order to avoid any conflict of interest, the org team members
should be an independent member with no ties to any of the participating
 projects

So I would like to formally request a budget of USD 30K (3K per slot with a
max of 10 slots) to move ahead with this process.

A clear criteria should exist before any approvals are exercised.
The board should ask :
*Do we have clear criteria for this program?*
In my opinion, no, just a bunch of emails.

*Has it been openly defined for all potential participating members and
project leaders?*
No, it should be published on a Wiki and send through the community
/owasp-leaders list for people to comment and agree. At least a clear
proposal should be setup and published.

After this process then I think we could go ahead and approve, because its
clear what are the rules for participation. There are still some
issues that I see as potential conflicts such as *for example*:

   - How many slots can a project get?
   - Should a project get more slots than others?
   - Based on what *exact*  criteria should we provide slots?
   - Should the org team have tights (such as being an active volunteer) to
   the participating project(this can be conflict of interest)



regards

Johanna



On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Fabio Cerullo <fcerullo at owasp.org> wrote:

> Tobias,
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> I think an escalation procedure on step #5 is in order in case there is a
> disagreement between the org team and the project mentors team about slots.
>
> So I would like to formally request a budget of USD 30K (3K per slot with
> a max of 10 slots) to move ahead with this process.
>
> I will appreciate the support from fellow Board members to make this
> happen.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Fabio Cerullo
> Global Board Member
> OWASP Foundation
> https://www.owasp.org
>
> On 7 Apr 2015, at 13:49, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>  Sounds fair to me.
>
> With one suggested addition: if there is disagreement in step #5, I like
> to see this reported to the org team / board / community for resolution
> without conflict of interest.
> If the teams agree with the resolution of step #5, I am happy and favour
> to go ahead. If there is serious disagreement, I like to hear about it.
>
> Best, Tobias
>
>
> On 07/04/15 05:33, Fabio Cerullo wrote:
>
> Jim,
>
>  Please allow me to explain a submission process might work for everyone:
>
>  1) Student review the ideas suggested by mentors. For example, GSOC 2015
> Ideas: https://www.owasp.org/index.php/GSoC2015_Ideas
> 2) Based on those ideas, the students submit their own ideas/projects.
> Usually there are dozens of ideas submitted by students, some are good,
> some are poor, and some are completely new. The mentors are not involved at
> this stage other than answering questions to the students. There is a
> deadline for the students submission.
> 3) The 'project leaders/mentors team' are the ones who evaluate and pick
> the best students proposals because they know about their projects. In the
> past, we allowed all mentors to score all proposals and that is what caused
> an issue because some people ‘down voted’ other proposals to let their own
> proposals to score higher.
> 4) The 'org team' makes sure that there is no wrong doing by reviewing
> scores/etc. Last year, the issue above was identified by Kostas/staff and
> it was promptly addressed. An additional control that could be implemented,
> and we were hoping to implement this year at GSOC, is that no mentor could
> vote on other project proposals (e.g. ZAP mentors cannot down vote on OWTF
> proposals and viceversa). So that will bubble up naturally all the best
> proposals for each corresponding project based on scores from the project
> leaders/mentors.
> 5) Finally, the org team in conjunction with the project mentors team then
> decide how many slots each project will get.
>
>  Does it sound fair?
>
>  Fabio Cerullo
> Global Board Member
> OWASP Foundation
> https://www.owasp.org
>
>  On 6 Apr 2015, at 20:07, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>
> I suggest the mentors work with students to make great proposals and
> have a •different group vote on who wins•. The whole issue was mentors
> voting on projects and we should consider avoiding that if we
> replicate a similar program at OWASP.
>
> --
> Jim Manico
> @Manicode
> (808) 652-3805
>
> On Apr 6, 2015, at 10:04 AM, Fabio Cerullo <fcerullo at owasp.org> wrote:
>
> The ‘Mentors team’ will review/score the proposals and select the best
> ones with an oversight from the ‘Organisation Team’.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing listOwasp-board at lists.owasp.orghttps://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20150407/bc5d391b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list