Angel Pons has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38829 )
Change subject: Documentation: Add new GSoC projects ......................................................................
Patch Set 6: Code-Review+1
(8 comments)
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38829/6/Documentation/contributing/... File Documentation/contributing/project_ideas.md:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38829/6/Documentation/contributing/... PS6, Line 190: doesn't don't
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38829/6/Documentation/contributing/... PS6, Line 220: i spurious `i`: exis*i*ting
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38829/6/Documentation/contributing/... PS6, Line 221: consisting out of consisting of
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38829/6/Documentation/contributing/... PS6, Line 224: task plural? tasks
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38829/6/Documentation/contributing/... PS6, Line 228: last test Should the results of previous tests be kept around? After reading this, it is unclear to me.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38829/6/Documentation/contributing/... PS6, Line 234: working? Note that, if a board is not working, then some of the elements below might not be obtainable.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38829/6/Documentation/contributing/... PS6, Line 235: commit hash This has a rather nasty problem: it makes reports done using out-of-tree patches, such as when adding support for a new mainboard, unidentifiable. Do we want to support this use-case?
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38829/6/Documentation/contributing/... PS6, Line 242: Not required Well, one would have to collect all the requirements that must be satisfied in order to design the database structure. If one also has to learn what coreboot is about when doing this project, not being able to keep up with the schedule is a major risk. How about:
* coreboot knowledge: Non-technical, needed to perform requirements analysis