polygene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Niclas Hedhman (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Updated] (ZEST-17) Establish self-assessed Apache Maturity Model declaration.
Date Thu, 04 Jun 2015 01:16:37 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZEST-17?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Niclas Hedhman updated ZEST-17:
-------------------------------
    Description: 
We should publish our self-assessed Maturity Model, as described here;

https://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html


Below is the full list, but the ones that currently need some attention are;
* LC50
* QU30
* QU40
* CO10
* CS!0
* CS30



CD10  -  YES
    The project produces Open Source software, for distribution to the public at no charge.
CD20  -  YES
    The project's code is easily discoverable and publicly accessible. 
CD30  -  YES
    The code can be built in a reproducible way using widely available standard tools. 
CD40  -  YES
    The full history of the project's code is available via a source code control system,
in a way that allows any released version to be recreated. 
CD50  -  YES
    The provenance of each line of code is established via the source code control system,
in a reliable way based on strong authentication of the committer. When third-party contributions
are committed, commit messages provide reliable information about the code provenance.



LC10  -  YES
    The code is released under the Apache License, version 2.0. 
LC20  -  YES  (if we drop Neo4j EntityStore)
    Libraries that are mandatory dependencies of the project's code do not create more restrictions
than the Apache License does. 
LC30  -  YES
    The libraries mentioned in LC20 are available as Open Source software. 
LC40  -  YES
    Committers are bound by an Individual Contributor Agreement (the "Apache iCLA") that defines
which code they are allowed to commit and how they need to identify code that is not their
own. 
LC50  -  ?? (I think we need to update documentation and refer to Apache pages)
    The copyright ownership of everything that the project produces is clearly defined and
documented.



RE10  -  YES
    Releases consist of source code, distributed using standard and open archive formats that
are expected to stay readable in the long term.
RE20  -  YES (yet to happen)
    Releases are approved by the project's PMC (see CS10), in order to make them an act of
the Foundation. 
RE30  -  YES
    Releases are signed and/or distributed along with digests that can be reliably used to
validate the downloaded archives. 
RE40  -  YES
    Convenience binaries can be distributed alongside source code but they are not Apache
Releases -- they are just a convenience provided with no guarantee. 




QU10  -  YES
    The project is open and honest about the quality of its code. Various levels of quality
and maturity for various modules are natural and acceptable as long as they are clearly communicated.

QU20  -  YES
    The project puts a very high priority on producing secure software.
QU30  -  NO (no documentation how to report this, but ASF provides a security@ mailing list
for that purpose)
    The project provides a well-documented channel to report security issues, along with a
documented way of responding to them. 8 
QU40  -  NO (we are not big enough where this is a major concern)
    The project puts a high priority on backwards compatibility and aims to document any incompatible
changes and provide tools and documentation to help users transition to new features. 
QU50  -  OK
    The project strives to respond to documented bug reports in a timely manner. 



CO10  -  NO (need to update docs)
    The project has a well-known homepage that points to all the information required to operate
according to this maturity model. 
CO20  -  YES
    The community welcomes contributions from anyone who acts in good faith and in a respectful
manner and adds value to the project. 
CO30  -  YES
    Contributions include not only source code, but also documentation, constructive bug reports,
constructive discussions, marketing and generally anything that adds value to the project.

CO40  -  YES
    The community is meritocratic and over time aims to give more rights and responsibilities
to contributors who add value to the project. 
CO50  -  YES (Perhaps need a bit more alignment with ASF)
    The way in which contributors can be granted more rights such as commit access or decision
power is clearly documented and is the same for all contributors. 
CO60  -  YES
    The community operates based on consensus of its members (see CS10) who have decision
power. Dictators, benevolent or not, are not welcome in Apache projects. 
CO70  -  YES
    The project strives to answer user questions in a timely manner. 



CS10  -  NO (the current documentation doesn't align with PMC membership. Needs update)
    The project maintains a public list of its contributors who have decision power -- the
project's PMC (Project Management Committee) consists of those contributors. 

CS20  -  YES
    Decisions are made by consensus among PMC members and are documented on the project's
main communications channel. Community opinions are taken into account but the PMC has the
final word if needed. 

CS30  -  ??? (Check whether we have any voting)
    Documented voting rules are used to build consensus when discussion is not sufficient.

CS40  -  YES
    In Apache projects, vetoes are only valid for code commits and are justified by a technical
explanation, as per the Apache voting rules defined in CS30. 

CS50  -  YES
    All "important" discussions happen asynchronously in written form on the project's main
communications channel. Offline, face-to-face or private discussions that affect the project
are also documented on that channel. 




IN10  -  YES
    The project is independent from any corporate or organizational influence.
IN20  -  YES
    Contributors act as themselves as opposed to representatives of a corporation or organization.




  was:
We should publish our self-assessed Maturity Model, as described here;

https://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html



CD10  -  YES
    The project produces Open Source software, for distribution to the public at no charge.
CD20  -  YES
    The project's code is easily discoverable and publicly accessible. 
CD30  -  YES
    The code can be built in a reproducible way using widely available standard tools. 
CD40  -  YES
    The full history of the project's code is available via a source code control system,
in a way that allows any released version to be recreated. 
CD50  -  YES
    The provenance of each line of code is established via the source code control system,
in a reliable way based on strong authentication of the committer. When third-party contributions
are committed, commit messages provide reliable information about the code provenance.



LC10  -  YES
    The code is released under the Apache License, version 2.0. 
LC20  -  YES  (if we drop Neo4j EntityStore)
    Libraries that are mandatory dependencies of the project's code do not create more restrictions
than the Apache License does. 
LC30  -  YES
    The libraries mentioned in LC20 are available as Open Source software. 
LC40  -  YES
    Committers are bound by an Individual Contributor Agreement (the "Apache iCLA") that defines
which code they are allowed to commit and how they need to identify code that is not their
own. 
LC50  -  ?? (I think we need to update documentation and refer to Apache pages)
    The copyright ownership of everything that the project produces is clearly defined and
documented.



RE10  -  YES
    Releases consist of source code, distributed using standard and open archive formats that
are expected to stay readable in the long term.
RE20  -  YES (yet to happen)
    Releases are approved by the project's PMC (see CS10), in order to make them an act of
the Foundation. 
RE30  -  YES
    Releases are signed and/or distributed along with digests that can be reliably used to
validate the downloaded archives. 
RE40  -  YES
    Convenience binaries can be distributed alongside source code but they are not Apache
Releases -- they are just a convenience provided with no guarantee. 




QU10  -  YES
    The project is open and honest about the quality of its code. Various levels of quality
and maturity for various modules are natural and acceptable as long as they are clearly communicated.

QU20  -  YES
    The project puts a very high priority on producing secure software.
QU30  -  NO (no documentation how to report this, but ASF provides a security@ mailing list
for that purpose)
    The project provides a well-documented channel to report security issues, along with a
documented way of responding to them. 8 
QU40  -  NO (we are not big enough where this is a major concern)
    The project puts a high priority on backwards compatibility and aims to document any incompatible
changes and provide tools and documentation to help users transition to new features. 
QU50  -  OK
    The project strives to respond to documented bug reports in a timely manner. 



CO10  -  NO (need to update docs)
    The project has a well-known homepage that points to all the information required to operate
according to this maturity model. 
CO20  -  YES
    The community welcomes contributions from anyone who acts in good faith and in a respectful
manner and adds value to the project. 
CO30  -  YES
    Contributions include not only source code, but also documentation, constructive bug reports,
constructive discussions, marketing and generally anything that adds value to the project.

CO40  -  YES
    The community is meritocratic and over time aims to give more rights and responsibilities
to contributors who add value to the project. 
CO50  -  YES (Perhaps need a bit more alignment with ASF)
    The way in which contributors can be granted more rights such as commit access or decision
power is clearly documented and is the same for all contributors. 
CO60  -  YES
    The community operates based on consensus of its members (see CS10) who have decision
power. Dictators, benevolent or not, are not welcome in Apache projects. 
CO70  -  YES
    The project strives to answer user questions in a timely manner. 



CS10  -  NO (the current documentation doesn't align with PMC membership. Needs update)
    The project maintains a public list of its contributors who have decision power -- the
project's PMC (Project Management Committee) consists of those contributors. 

CS20  -  YES
    Decisions are made by consensus among PMC members and are documented on the project's
main communications channel. Community opinions are taken into account but the PMC has the
final word if needed. 

CS30  -  ??? (Check whether we have any voting)
    Documented voting rules are used to build consensus when discussion is not sufficient.

CS40  -  YES
    In Apache projects, vetoes are only valid for code commits and are justified by a technical
explanation, as per the Apache voting rules defined in CS30. 

CS50  -  YES
    All "important" discussions happen asynchronously in written form on the project's main
communications channel. Offline, face-to-face or private discussions that affect the project
are also documented on that channel. 




IN10  -  YES
    The project is independent from any corporate or organizational influence.
IN20  -  YES
    Contributors act as themselves as opposed to representatives of a corporation or organization.





> Establish self-assessed Apache Maturity Model declaration.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZEST-17
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZEST-17
>             Project: Zest
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Niclas Hedhman
>
> We should publish our self-assessed Maturity Model, as described here;
> https://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html
> Below is the full list, but the ones that currently need some attention are;
> * LC50
> * QU30
> * QU40
> * CO10
> * CS!0
> * CS30
> CD10  -  YES
>     The project produces Open Source software, for distribution to the public at no charge.
> CD20  -  YES
>     The project's code is easily discoverable and publicly accessible. 
> CD30  -  YES
>     The code can be built in a reproducible way using widely available standard tools.

> CD40  -  YES
>     The full history of the project's code is available via a source code control system,
in a way that allows any released version to be recreated. 
> CD50  -  YES
>     The provenance of each line of code is established via the source code control system,
in a reliable way based on strong authentication of the committer. When third-party contributions
are committed, commit messages provide reliable information about the code provenance.
> LC10  -  YES
>     The code is released under the Apache License, version 2.0. 
> LC20  -  YES  (if we drop Neo4j EntityStore)
>     Libraries that are mandatory dependencies of the project's code do not create more
restrictions than the Apache License does. 
> LC30  -  YES
>     The libraries mentioned in LC20 are available as Open Source software. 
> LC40  -  YES
>     Committers are bound by an Individual Contributor Agreement (the "Apache iCLA") that
defines which code they are allowed to commit and how they need to identify code that is not
their own. 
> LC50  -  ?? (I think we need to update documentation and refer to Apache pages)
>     The copyright ownership of everything that the project produces is clearly defined
and documented.
> RE10  -  YES
>     Releases consist of source code, distributed using standard and open archive formats
that are expected to stay readable in the long term.
> RE20  -  YES (yet to happen)
>     Releases are approved by the project's PMC (see CS10), in order to make them an act
of the Foundation. 
> RE30  -  YES
>     Releases are signed and/or distributed along with digests that can be reliably used
to validate the downloaded archives. 
> RE40  -  YES
>     Convenience binaries can be distributed alongside source code but they are not Apache
Releases -- they are just a convenience provided with no guarantee. 
> QU10  -  YES
>     The project is open and honest about the quality of its code. Various levels of quality
and maturity for various modules are natural and acceptable as long as they are clearly communicated.

> QU20  -  YES
>     The project puts a very high priority on producing secure software.
> QU30  -  NO (no documentation how to report this, but ASF provides a security@ mailing
list for that purpose)
>     The project provides a well-documented channel to report security issues, along with
a documented way of responding to them. 8 
> QU40  -  NO (we are not big enough where this is a major concern)
>     The project puts a high priority on backwards compatibility and aims to document
any incompatible changes and provide tools and documentation to help users transition to new
features. 
> QU50  -  OK
>     The project strives to respond to documented bug reports in a timely manner. 
> CO10  -  NO (need to update docs)
>     The project has a well-known homepage that points to all the information required
to operate according to this maturity model. 
> CO20  -  YES
>     The community welcomes contributions from anyone who acts in good faith and in a
respectful manner and adds value to the project. 
> CO30  -  YES
>     Contributions include not only source code, but also documentation, constructive
bug reports, constructive discussions, marketing and generally anything that adds value to
the project. 
> CO40  -  YES
>     The community is meritocratic and over time aims to give more rights and responsibilities
to contributors who add value to the project. 
> CO50  -  YES (Perhaps need a bit more alignment with ASF)
>     The way in which contributors can be granted more rights such as commit access or
decision power is clearly documented and is the same for all contributors. 
> CO60  -  YES
>     The community operates based on consensus of its members (see CS10) who have decision
power. Dictators, benevolent or not, are not welcome in Apache projects. 
> CO70  -  YES
>     The project strives to answer user questions in a timely manner. 
> CS10  -  NO (the current documentation doesn't align with PMC membership. Needs update)
>     The project maintains a public list of its contributors who have decision power --
the project's PMC (Project Management Committee) consists of those contributors. 
> CS20  -  YES
>     Decisions are made by consensus among PMC members and are documented on the project's
main communications channel. Community opinions are taken into account but the PMC has the
final word if needed. 
> CS30  -  ??? (Check whether we have any voting)
>     Documented voting rules are used to build consensus when discussion is not sufficient.
> CS40  -  YES
>     In Apache projects, vetoes are only valid for code commits and are justified by a
technical explanation, as per the Apache voting rules defined in CS30. 
> CS50  -  YES
>     All "important" discussions happen asynchronously in written form on the project's
main communications channel. Offline, face-to-face or private discussions that affect the
project are also documented on that channel. 
> IN10  -  YES
>     The project is independent from any corporate or organizational influence.
> IN20  -  YES
>     Contributors act as themselves as opposed to representatives of a corporation or
organization. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message