[OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating

[Bob Basques]

All,

Instead of a 5 star rating, what about  using a small standardized chart of some sort.  5-10 items each with their own rating (or classification).  One of these items could be tied to the incubation process for example.

Some Items off the top of my head that would be useful (grabbing some from the conversation too):

*  Incubation status
*  Age of project
*  Number of commiters
*  Language(s)  (Perl, Javascript, Java, etc)
*  OS Supported (Window, Linux, Mac, etc)
*  Mobile Version (Yes/No)
* etc. . . .

Also upon thinking on this some more, this smaller standardized form could be expanded into a Specification sheet for each project.  Additionally the standardized form could be mixed and matched based on the project focus, so that the Project leader could decide which items go into the standardized (smaller, Short Version of a) chart for Marketing.

Just thinking out loud here.

bobb




>>> Daniel Morissette <dmorissette at mapgears.com> 06/06/10 7:21 PM >>>
I'm also not too keen on a star ranking system, especially if it is 
mostly based on having passed incubation or not.

To me, passing incubation is more an indication of good process 
management and long term viability than an indication of software 
quality/robustness and ability to really solve the user's needs. 
However, a star ranking system makes me think of hotel/restaurant rating 
and would mislead the user to think that a software with 4 stars 
(because it passed incubation) does a better job than others with 2 or 3 
which is not necessarily the case.

If the goal is to denote whether a project has passed incubation or not 
then let's call the rating that way (which is what we currently do when 
we differentiate between graduated and in-incubation projects on 
www.osgeo.org). If we want to create a "project maturity rating" then it 
will have to take into account several variables as Andrea wrote 
earlier... and then defining those variables and evaluating each piece 
of software against them will be quite a task.

In the end, I just wanted to register the fact that I too am worried 
about the possible side-effects of a poorly handled rating system on our 
communities.

Daniel


Cameron Shorter wrote:
> On 06/06/10 10:14, Jason Birch wrote:
>> IMHO getting into rating projects is just asking for trouble, 
>> infighting, bitterness, and people/projects walking away from OSGeo.
>>
> 
> Jason, this is a valid concern with decent founding. However I think the 
> potential for conflict is not as bad as you may think, and there is a 
> very strong user community desire for, and value to be gained from such 
> ratings.
> 
> 1. We already have a rating system, based upon:
> * Project has completed incubation
> * Project is in incubation
> * Project is not in incubation
> What I'm suggesting is that we apply a star system to these stages.
> 
> 2. We already have a criteria for defining this rating, (which may be 
> refined), which reduces the subjectiveness and hence the potential for 
> conflict.
> 


-- 
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss