[Board] osgeo labs - Maturity Rating

[blammo]

All,

I think that the 5th point needs to stay included, for a while at least.

Adding the requirement for training aspects to a project may be somewhat 
off-putting to potential new projects.  It also seems somewhat hard to 
define, how much training materials are enough, I would imagine they are 
different per project too.  I think always having that loftier goal on 
top (5 Star rating) is a good thing, even if not all project attain it.

bobb




On 9/22/14 3:29 AM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:
> Cameron, I do not like your (or marketing's) proposal - it seems to
> me, it's too towards-incubation oriented. But it has some important
> details. I also think, 4 and 5 should be merged.
>
> I propose following version:
>
> 1 - Project has name, OSI license, header files are clean, can be in beta stage
> 2 - Project is stable, produces (or produced in the past) stable releases
> 3 - Project has Stable Software, a Stable community, is deployed in
> production systems, and is ready to pass criteria to enter incubation,
> as per:http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/evaluation.html
> 4 -  Project has passed osgeo incubation, it also includes bundled
> software, regular builds, security updates, training, etc.
>
> comments?
>
> Jachym
>
> 2014-09-20 1:24 GMT+02:00 Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>:
>> We discussed a 5 star maturity rating in 2010. I still like the idea, but it
>> was contentious at the time, especially with projects which would rank low
>> on the rating, and it was eventually dropped in favour of using just
>> "Incubated"/"Incubating" as more politically acceptable.
>>
>> This is what we proposed:
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php?title=Marketing_Artefacts&oldid=51118#Maturity_Rating
>>
>> Maturity Rating
>>
>> Description A 5 star rating system to qualify the how established a project
>> is. Rating is to be broken down as follows:
>>
>> 5 stars: This rating is yet to be defined, and will not be allocated to
>> projects yet. Project includes bundled software, regular builds, security
>> updates, training, etc.
>> 4 stars (mature): Project has passed osgeo incubation as per:
>> http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_graduation_checklist.html
>> 3.5 stars: Not to be used yet, but may later be introduced for projects
>> which have entered incubation.
>> 3 stars (established): Project has Stable Software, a Stable community, is
>> deployed in production systems, and is ready to pass criteria to enter
>> incubation, as per:http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/evaluation.html
>> 2 stars (stable): Project has Stable Software.
>>
>> Project produces periodic releases of stable software which is used in
>> production systems.
>>
>> 1 star (beta): Project has Beta software.
>>
>>
>> Discussion about it here:
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2010-June/thread.html
>>
>> On 19/09/2014 8:41 am, Luca Delucchi wrote:
>>
>> On 18 September 2014 23:10, Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Or
>>
>> level 1 - project (name, license, headers)
>> level 2 - code clean checked
>> level 3 - steering committee
>> level 4 - ...
>> level 5 - community, mature osgeo project
>>
>> drift between levels is possible both ways (you lost community e.g.)
>>
>> I really like this idea...
>>
>> jody could give more insight view
>>
>> Jachym
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter,
>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> LISAsoft
>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>
>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>


-- 
Bob Basques
bbasques at sharedgeo.org
612.598.9210

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20140922/b2e50a6d/attachment.htm>