I have submitted my GSoC 2026 proposal this evening.
Thankyou you for all your guidance & thanks @clairep94 for providing such detailed feedback on my draft proposal. I tried my best to address every point of the feedback thoroughly into my final proposal.
Looking forward to keep contributing more to the processing foundation especially the p5.js web editor.
Thanks again for all your hard work and collaborative spirit in the last couple of months. I am very excited about the energy youāve already brought to the project!
The application period is now closed.
We have received over 100 proposals.
Next, during April:
Org admin(s) will review whether each application has met baseline requirements. This includes including required information in the proposal; meeting expectations in online community space engagement; and meeting GSoC eligibility requirements.
Every proposal that has met baseline requirements will be assessed in detail by mentor(s) and org admin(s). We may follow up with finalists over email if we have additional questions; please be sure to allow ākit at processingfoundation dot orgā in your inbox. (If you donāt hear from us that can also be okay, some of you are very active in online community spaces and have gone through multiple revisions of the proposals. We will only reach out if we need more information, thereās no āinterviewā process.)
We provide Processing Foundationās rankings to GSoC. Then, GSoC allocates slots and announces the recipients. This means that until the GSoC announcement, we cannot provide any information about the decision (because we also donāt know, ultimately, what will be provided).
After the announcement, all applications that have met baseline requirements will receive feedback (per email) on their proposal. All applications that have not met the baseline requirements will also receive an explanation.
Would this be the best way to reach out to the .core maintainers for their feedback with regard to my proposal (separately of GSoC now since applications have closed.. to get a fresh perspective and possible direction should I still want to experiment with implementing .glb support to Processing).
Thank you @kit for all the timely updates, and for all the effort you and the mentors have put into this process, including discussions and proposal reviews. The mentor feedback was very helpful to me.
Thank you @kit for being so helpful. I submitted the proposal yesterday. I wanted to give it for the reviews, but due to my exams (which end tomorrow), I couldnāt keep track of those deadlines. However, Iām hopeful for the proposal Iāve turned in. Even if my proposal becomes unsuccessful, may I request you to please provide feedback or a brief review of my proposal, with the decision?
I realise you have 100+ proposals and a short time to review them. You can give me the feedback only if the team has time left.
UPDATE: I read your post from 15h hours ago. It does list same in point 4. Thank you for providing the reviews.
Hi @claudine! I have added edge case and stroke tests for primitive shapes ā all 12 tests pass locally. I have requested assignment on Issue #1465. Could you please assign me so I can open a PR on the visual-testing branch?
We are so grateful to have received almost 120 applications to work with Processing Foundation as the mentor org for Google Summer of Code 2026, including many exceptional proposals. During the final round of application review, every finalist and semi-finalist proposal was carefully reviewed by 2-5 people, including mentors, org admins, and core contributors relevant to the topic. Given the number of outstanding proposals weāve received, the selection process was very difficult. This week, we received the wonderful news that Processing Foundation has been awarded a total of 6 slots from Google Summer of Code! These are all very exciting projects, and weād like to congratulate this yearās cohort. You can see the selected projects here.
Due to the really strong applicants and creative ideas weāve received this year, the p5.js Shared Responsibility Committee will consider supporting the strongest applications that unfortunately did not receive a slot through Processing Foundationās Open Source Software Microgrants Program. We will send everyone an email by May 9th, which will include (1) feedback on your GSoC application and, in some cases, (2) information about the microgrant program.
All applications were reviewed by GSoC@PF org admins and mentors, and below are some general observations on how we made final decisions. In addition to similar considerations that were also relevant last year, the following guided our decision:
Whether and how an artistic or creative practice informed the project idea
PRs were not required (not all of the 6 selected contributors have merged PRs), but if PRs were made we looked at whether they followed contributor guidelines, and how much they were opened or closed.
Helpful activity in online community spaces: generally, balancing different types of contribution is most helpful. For example, this could be participating in technical discussions, testing, helping to review PRs, and contributing code. When contributing code, it is very helpful when contributions follow guidance in the program and contribution guidelines. Making surface-level PRs that increased the volume of review requests was in some cases not helpful.
Motivation: we looked for applications where the proposed project was very relevant to the personal values and technical interests of the applicant.
For technically ambitious proposals, we also looked for evidence of relevant prior experience in the proposal, materials you linked, or in contribution history.
Within the next couple of days, all applicants will receive (or have already received) some feedback. (If you do not receive anything via email by the end of day on May 9th, but you applied, please @ or message me!)
Hey @kit thanks for the update and for being transparent about the whole process, really appreciate it. I have a quick question though, were the proposals actually ranked during the review? If so could you include those in the feedbacks or atleast in mine? Would really help me understand where Iām at and what to work on for next year.