[GSoC Application Review] Application Review for Wayland Project

[Pekka Paalanen]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 13:43:06 +0100
Armin Krezović <armin.krezovic at fet.ba> wrote:

> On 21.3.2016 8:57, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> > On Sat, 19 Mar 2016 23:33:21 +0100
> > Armin Krezović <armin.krezovic at fet.ba> wrote:
> >  
> >> On 13.03.2016 18:22, Armin Krezović wrote:  
> >>> Hello Pekka, Quentin and Kat (sorry, don't know the real name yet).
> >>>
> >>> Pekka and Quentin have volounteered to review my GSoC application
> >>> draft for the Wayland project. Pekka also suggested to add Kat to
> >>> the list of reviewers.
> >>>
> >>> As suggested, I've used Google Docs to create a document. You can
> >>> access it at:
> >>>
> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bBgH8h9UiAPkipGjxHePnmcVU73Tef033-xojVWIhCU/
> >>>
> >>> Embedded below is the text from document, so you can comment on
> >>> individual sentences/paragraphs/etc if needed.
> >>>
> >>> Thank you in advance and looking forward to your reply.
> >>>
> >>> Armin.
> >>>  
> >>
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> The proposal has been updated to reflect all the feedback I've
> >> received so far. I didn't include the text in the mail this time.
> >>
> >> Pekka and Quentin should be able to comment on the Google document
> >> which is available at the URL referenced above.
> >>
> >> Please let me know if any other adjustments are needed.
> >>
> >> Highlights:
> >>
> >> - Completely rewrite Project Scope paragraph to include more details.
> >> - Improve wording in Dedication paragraph so I sound more dedicated :).
> >> - Extend Dedication paragraph to include additional information on
> >>    how the project will be realized.
> >>
> >> If all goes well with this one, I plan to submit it on Monday, as
> >> said in one of the replies.  
> >
> > Hi Armin,
> >  
> 
> Salut,
> 
> > in "dedication" you refer to "the first part of my proposal" but that
> > is not too clear, I am left to guess what you mean.

> 
> Now that you mention it, it looks kinda confusing. How about now? I've 
> included 3 tasks in a list so it's more clear which is the first one.

Much better, now I think I can guess right. :-)

I could still nitpick on not defining what "parts" are, since the first
occurrence of the word "part" is in the dedication section and nothing
is called "a part" before that. ;-)

If you wrote "That includes three parts:" and numbered the bullet
points, that would make it perfectly clear. Then you can refer to part
1, part 2, etc.


Thanks,
pq
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/attachments/20160321/8f277b79/attachment.sig>