[Marketing] Re: [Live-demo] Alternative to describing maturity with stars?

[Seven (aka Arnulf)]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Marketing,
the "Maturity Rating" [1] part of the Marketing Artefacts page is still
very much in discussion. The page does not clearly state that it is not
official OSGeo process but work in progress. To avoid giving the
impression that we have a "Maturity Rating" which we currently very much
don't have I suggest to separate this out to either the talk page of
this Wiki page or a separate page altogether.

Some of the other requirements might make sense right away but are also
still in discussion or at least have not been communicated properly to
the projects as official OSGeo process & or requirement.

Best regards,
Arnulf

[1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Marketing_Artefacts#Maturity_Rating

Alex Mandel wrote:
> On 07/13/2010 04:28 AM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>> On 12/07/10 16:25, Hamish wrote:
>>> * *Cameron wrote:
>>>
>>>     We could specify maturity as a string, of maturity levels, with
>>>     the current maturity in bold, like:
>>>
>>>     *Maturity:* (/mature/ | **established** | /stable/ | /beta/)
>>>
>>>     This still helps users distinguish between projects, without stars.
>>>     Would that address people's concerns?
>>>
>>> Sounds good to me (although I don't really see the need to list the
>>> unused words; seems obvious).
>>>
>>> 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?' ..
>>>
>>> what would the difference between "mature" and "established" be? how
>>> about vs .stable?
>>>
>> Hamish,
>> We could provide a hyperlink to a description of the maturity terms,
>> which would contain something link:
>>
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Marketing_Artefacts#Maturity_Rating
>>
>> A 5 star rating system to qualify the how established a project is.
>> Rating is to be broken down as follows:
>>
>>    * (mature): Project has passed osgeo incubation as per:
>>     
>> http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_graduation_checklist.html
>>
>>    * (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
>>    * (stable): Project has Stable Software.
>>          o Project produces periodic releases of stable software which
>>            is used in production systems.
>>    * (beta): Project has Beta software.
>>
>>
>> Alex,
>> 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.
>>
>>
> 
> What I'm getting at is are we like other labeling systems?
> Example: Organic, FSC (Forest Sustainabitily Council), Fair Trade
> If we are, maybe "OSGeo Healthy Software" or "Sustainable Software"
> would be a better term to describe Graduation.
> 
> Or are we more like Time's magazine top 10 geospatial of the year,
> Screen Actors Guild Awards, where a list of possibilities is shrunk down
> to just the best. "OSGeo TopPicks"
> 
> Or maybe like an Electricians Union, you apprentice with us and then we
> certify you as qualified to work. "OSGeo Certified"
> 
> Depending on how OSGeo considers it's system would help to dictate how
> we market the OSGeo project concept to people.
> 
> I think this is a big question, that the Foundation will need to
> address, I don't think the LiveDVD team should make that determination.
> 
> 
> Calling a non-osgeo "(established)" based on above is actually a
> disincentive for them to ever bother with incubation since it will be a
> stamp saying they are equivalent without doing the process, I fear it
> will weaken the brand. It brings up the bigger question: are we trying
> to encourage more projects to join OSGeo? If we aren't then it will be
> hard to be the center of FOSS4G...
> See the dilemmna, by our own self interest OSGeo needs to rank non-OSGeo
> products as not being the same, no matter how mature they are they still
> haven't done the OSGeo process, to do otherwise is contrary to the
> branding. (I realize this borders on elitism, hence the need for a very
> open door - OSGeo Labs)
> 
> Thanks,
> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> Marketing mailing list
> Marketing at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing


- --
Arnulf Christl

Exploring Space, Time and Mind
http://arnulf.us
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkw8tpUACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b3S8gCfaIYQ+ecydnSmb86yrHBrULH1
cFQAn29IdvD9SQbgevdpDjIfsBTDT4oN
=icsW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----