[Owasp-board] OWASP Summer Code Sprint Proposal

johanna curiel curiel johanna.curiel at owasp.org
Tue Mar 3 21:30:57 UTC 2015


   - Have a formal selection process with ideally a committee of leaders
   making the selections
   - Those involved in the selection process cannot also submit
   - Those involved in the selection process are also responsible for
   assessing completion
   - All work produced is provided under the same open source license as
   the project

This is very important. Neutrality and transparency who can get selected
and who does not

Also keep in mind there are projects that are inactive and have used Gsoc
as a way to revive

A criteria should be clearly established to avoid any misunderstandings and
abuses

I keep on remembering that getting the Gsoc slots has been an on going
discussion among participating project leaders

regards

Johanna

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:

> +1 I agree with Joshs perspective on this. I'd personally vote no if I had
> to make a decision on these funds today.
>
> --
> Jim Manico
> @Manicode
> (808) 652-3805
>
> On Mar 3, 2015, at 2:25 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>
> To some extent, I think this gets back to the "should OWASP pay people to
> work on it's tools" debate.  In my personal opinion, I think that the
> answer is "yes", provided that we:
>
>    - Have a pre-defined scope for the opportunity with specific
>    milestones required
>    - Have a pre-defined award for completing the opportunity
>    - Publicly publish any and all opportunities so that anyone can
>    express an interest in them
>    - Have a formal selection process with ideally a committee of leaders
>    making the selections
>    - Those involved in the selection process cannot also submit
>    - Those involved in the selection process are also responsible for
>    assessing completion
>    - All work produced is provided under the same open source license as
>    the project
>
> If we have agreement on these points, then I would suggest extending
> Fabio's proposal to be a much broader OWASP call for ideas (not just GSoC
> submissions).  Put a two week limit on submissions and, once expired, put
> all reasonable ideas someplace public.  Submit a press release stating that
> we are looking for students interested in tackling these challenges and
> providing the details.  As long as this is no longer GSoC, then we get to
> make up our own rules, and I think that we should take a step back to
> evaluate how WE would want this to work.  What goal do WE want to
> accomplish with this initiative.  I'm all for allocating $30k here, but
> don't just want it to be OWASP's rejected rehashing of GSoC.
>
> ~josh
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Fabio Cerullo <fcerullo at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> As you probably know by now, we have not been accepted to Google Summer
>> of Code this year.
>>
>> Usually, this is a major push for projects during the year as experienced
>> by ZAP, OWTF, Appsensor, Hackademics, Seraphimdroid, etc. For a full list
>> of ideas in 2015 please check the following URL:
>>
>> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/GSoC2015_Ideas
>>
>> In order to keep the momentum going and progress those projects, I would
>> like to request an extraordinary budget allocation of 30K USD to cover up
>> to 10 student slots at 3K each. Usually Google pays 5500 USD per student
>> during GSOC. We will use the same structure as previous years with
>> Kostas/me as org admins, the project leaders who usually participate in
>> GSOC (Core team) will pick the best student submissions and then a group of
>> dedicated OWASP volunteers who every year act as mentors for the students.
>> We could establish a mid-term and full term evaluation where if a student
>> is failed mid-term he/she will only receive half the funds (1500 USD). If
>> the student is approved full term, he/she receives the full amount (3000
>> USD).
>>
>> I understand this is a non-planned expenditure, but considering the
>> importance of GSOC in the last couple of years to progress OWASP coding
>> projects, I think is imperative to take some action considering the current
>> scenario.
>>
>> If you have any questions, please let us know.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Fabio
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Owasp-board mailing list
>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>> https://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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150303/90fb16a8/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list