<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 12/07/10 16:25, Hamish wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:918760.63894.qm@web110009.mail.gq1.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td
style="font-family: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-size: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-size-adjust: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; -x-system-font: none;"
valign="top"><b><span style="font-style: italic;"> </span></b>Cameron
wrote:<br>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">
<div id="yiv1767680818">We could specify maturity as a
string, of maturity levels, with the
current maturity in bold, like:<br>
<br>
<strong>Maturity:</strong> (<em>mature</em> | <strong>*established*</strong>
| <em>stable</em> | <em>beta</em>)<br>
<br>
This still helps users distinguish between projects, without stars.<br>
Would that address people's concerns?<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div id="yiv1767680818">Sounds good to me (although I don't
really see the need to list the unused words; seems obvious).<br>
<br>
I just couldn't see giving a project like GMT with 1000s of spottings
in journals like Science and Nature a 2/5 == "stable" star rating and
not have someone in the audience saying 'wtf?' ..<br>
<br>
what would the difference between "mature" and "established" be? how
about vs .stable?<br>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</blockquote>
<br>
Hamish,<br>
We could provide a hyperlink to a description of the maturity terms,
which would contain something link:<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Marketing_Artefacts#Maturity_Rating">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Marketing_Artefacts#Maturity_Rating</a><br>
<br>
A 5 star rating system to qualify the how established a project is.
Rating is to be broken down as follows:
<ul>
<li>(mature): Project has passed osgeo incubation as per: <a
href="http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_graduation_checklist.html"
class="external free"
title="http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_graduation_checklist.html"
rel="nofollow">http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_graduation_checklist.html</a>
</li>
<li>(established): Project has Stable Software, a Stable community,
is deployed in production systems, and is ready to pass criteria to
enter incubation, as per: <a
href="http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/evaluation.html"
class="external free"
title="http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/evaluation.html"
rel="nofollow">http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/evaluation.html</a>
</li>
<li> (stable): Project has Stable Software.
<ul>
<li> Project produces periodic releases of stable software which
is used in production systems.
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li> (beta): Project has Beta software.
</li>
</ul>
<br>
Alex,<br>
While I'd prefer to use the words "graduated" and "in incubation", I've
found these words to be completely useless at OSGeo booths when talking
to newbies. Most don't know what OSGeo is, and if they do, they have no
idea what the incubation process is and what it means. Hence the move
to mature/established/stable/beta. Which I agree is only slightly
better, but I can' think of better words, and I'm not getting much
support for use of a star rating system.<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Director
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.lisasoft.com">http://www.lisasoft.com</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>