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

[Alex Mandel]

On 07/11/2010 11:25 PM, 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
> 
> 
> ps- the many fixes from the 4.0rc1 build seemed to have been quiet for a number of days, so time for the next one?
> 
>  

We do have a marketing meeting tomorrow, where we should discuss this
and send our recommendations to the Board for verification.

My feeling from the OSGeo side is that we should stick to OSGeo
"Graduated Project", Project in Incubation, OSGeo labs and other.
In this sense the OSGeo brand is in some ways a certification, it's not
to say that non-osgeo projects aren't stable/sustainable but being OSGeo
means you've met the known list.

Of course this would need to be discussed at the board level as it
implies that any/all projects that meet the list and go through the
process qualify (eliminates the issue over how many projects of a given
category should be OSGeo) but this may not be what OSGeo is going for
(Certification vs. Selective Club).


Yes, a build is scheduled for today, you raised on concerns over
requests being completed over weekends, should we move the builds to
Tuesdays or Fridays? I will get started in a few minutes on todays...

Thanks,
Alex