[OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating

[Michael P. Gerlek]

I'd suggest that a set of N icons/logos accompanied by the words "mature" / "beta" / etc would be better than stars, as it directly indicates to the customer what we're using as a metric.

Fixed, well-defined categories like this are good, because we do not want to get into subjective arguments over whether app A is "better" than app B.

(Along those lines, I'd also ask precisely what "ready to start" incubation means...)

-mpg


> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-
> bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 4:12 AM
> To: OSGeo Discussions
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating
> 
> Dave,
> So maybe we should have 1-5 stars (or osgeo logos) which is quickly
> visually understood by our target audience, and that is followed by a
> word or two describing each star rating.
> 
> 5 logos (not used yet)
> 4 logos (very mature - passed osgeo incubation)
> 3 logos (mature - started or ready to start osgeo incubation process)
> 2 logos (stable - puts our stable, tested releases which are used in
> production)
> 1 logo (beta software)
> 
> Dave Patton wrote:
> > On 2010/06/04 1:49 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> >> For the OSGeo LiveDVD and OSGeo marketing material, I propose we use
> >> a 5 star maturity rating. This is because it is too difficult to
> >> explain in a couple of words, the difference between: "Graduated",
> >> "In Incubation", "Stable", "Beta" Again, I'm interested to hear
> >> comments on whether I have defined a good rating system, before we
> >> set it in stone.
> >
> > Don't use any "rating system", as that implies to most people
> > some (usually subjective) judgment. For example, people looking
> > at marketing materials might think it reflects on "product quality".
> > It sounds to me like you want to define a simple "categorization
> > system", not a "rating system".
> >
> > Don't use "stars", because again, it's too often used as a visual
> > indicator in "rating systems".
> >
> > I'm still not convinced in my own mind that doing something as
> > simple as calling it a "Maturity Categorization", and using
> > from 1 to 5 OSGeo Logos vs using "stars" would provide a
> > solution that would be acceptable.
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Cameron Shorter
> Geospatial Solutions Manager
> 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
> http://www.lisasoft.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss