[OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating

[Yves Jacolin]

Boob,

You mean something like this : http://www.ohloh.net/p?q=osgeo ?

Regards,

Y.
Le lundi 07 juin 2010 17:02:44, Bob Basques a écrit :
> 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.

-- 
Yves Jacolin

http://yjacolin.gloobe.org