Hey!
- given that we are in the neuroscience domain, what skills should the candidate already have to be successful? (we are currently struggling slightly because we don't have enough volunteers from neuroscience to help us prioritise/organise our packaging tasks; 3 months is a short period to start from 0 and also do meaningful work)
1. Some knowledge of creating or working around software packages, be it a particular language's packaging scheme or for a Linux distribution. 2. Interest in (neuro)science? 3. How releases and versioning work. 4. Enthusiasm to send small fixes upstream to fix simple bugs/issues.
- will the candidate be able to continue as a long term NeuroFedora contributor?
- What must we do to improve the likelihood that they turn into long-term contributors?
I believe as a person creates a certain package, a sense of responsibility grows in their mind that they are responsible for the upbringing of the package so that others are not affected by it (at least I feel like that). This would ensure that they would continue as a NeuroFedora/Fedora contributor in the future as well. The whole process of packaging is pretty fun, and amazing if people know what they are doing, and how stuff works. Teaching them correctly, and at a steady pace would grow their interest in the topic.
- finally and probably most importantly, who has the knowledge/time/resources to mentor the candidate(s) throughout the project period, and maybe even after?
I wouldn't say that I have complete knowledge, but I have sufficient knowledge of how packages work. I would be happy to mentor as well. However, since this is the neuro-sig, I think the mentor(s) should have some neuroscience background as well? Assuming that, I know that they are busy people and often have not sufficient time to mentor the candidates, and this can/might be an issue. Otherwise, if someone else wants to volunteer, it would be pretty great as well. :D
Us being in the neuroscience domain complicates things a little. We are right in the middle of neuroscience and software development. It is quite a niche gap. Not a lot of neuro folks do software development, and not a lot of computing folks do neuroscience. The field is not yet in a state where both sections are actively being trained in both skill sets.
Quite right, and that's what complicates the whole thing. Even if the neuro-sig were to propose a project, it should be somewhat related to what we do. A project on packaging software alone is very abstract and can/may become a bit too complicated for the folks who are not much experienced in software development.
This is certainly not uncommon, but those of us that have been part of such projects generally tend to agree that packaging projects aren't the best because unless the candidate is interested in the domain of software that they are working with, they have no incentive to maintain their packages in the long run.
Maybe we can pitch the project to the candidates who are interested in neuro-stuff, who would be pleased to help people working on their packaged tool or library.