To Plone Community (especially Mentors and core contributors)
I'm concerned about the potential challenge of ensuring that high-quality candidates receive adequate mentorship in the face of a large volume of applications.
I fully acknowledge the dedication and commitment of the Plone community, particularly in the ongoing development of Plone/volto 7. However, given the limited number of maintainers available to serve as mentors this year, there is a possibility that some quality candidates seeking meaningful mentorship might get overlooked.
Defining the Quality Candidate at Plone
To clarify, when I refer to a "quality candidate," I mean someone who:
- Has been an active member of the
plone/developerscommunity for some time. - Has contributed to the best of their capacity.
- Has been consistently contributing for around 5–6 months.
- Does not view Plone merely as a GSoC opportunity for resume-building.
- Is genuinely interested in long-term involvement, potentially contributing full-time to Plone, its collective ecosystem, Zope (for those inclined toward backend development), or even joining Kitconcept in the future.
For new Fellow GSoC Aspirants
Above things might seem like a high bar for a GSoC applicant, but from my experience, Plone is one of the most complex CMS systems out there. Understanding how its core repositories—such as Volto, REST, REST API, CMFPlone, and various collective add-ons—interconnect takes months. Simply "jumping in and contributing" is not as straightforward as it might be for other organizations. That being said, there are certainly contributors who meet the above criteria, and I am not alone in this concern.That being said, all above are just a fellow contributor's perspective, nothing more, nothing less.
GSoC from quality candidate's perspective
GSoC presents an invaluable opportunity to bridge the gap between regular contributions and tackling a PLIP-level feature. While a GSoC project may not officially be classified as a PLIP, it allows contributors to work on substantial improvements under the guidance of experienced Plonists. This mentorship could enable us to:
- Gain the confidence to take on PLIP-level challenges.
- Engage more deeply in the community, seconding and proposing PLIPs.
- Begin matching the pace of core contributors, even if true expertise takes years to develop.
The Concern: Limited Mentorship Availability
Given that GSoC 2025 proposals are well underway, my concern stems from the fact that we may not see a significant increase in available mentors on the official Plone GSoC projects page (Plone GSoC 2025), and currently a total of only 2 unique menotors listed out of a vast number of experienced plonists.
This concern is not just mine alone—I have spoken with other potential contributors, including past GSoC participants who are considering reapplying, and they share similar sentiments.
A Request to the Plone Community
As open-source contributors, all we hope for is mentorship to the best capacity of the Plone community. If there is any possibility of expanding mentorship availability or structuring the selection process in a way that prioritizes long-term contributors, it would greatly benefit both GSoC applicants and Plone’s future.
Additionally, the discussion in this post aligns with the broader topic of fostering dedicated Plonists: Aligning GSoC Projects with Plone’s Architectural Principles.
I apologize if this post comes too early and if the core maintainers are still in the process of finalizing mentorship allocations. However, another fear was getting too late to post this 
. The outcome in both summer was more or less also for the 
Sent you a link to the spreadsheet in a DM and then tagged participants here.