On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org > wrote:
> Hi, > > Creating such a model has been on my todo list for ages, and in a > related discussion on board@ people seem to agree that having this can > be useful. > > So let's start - here's my rough initial list of items: > > Code: open, discoverable, fully public history, documented provenance > Quality: security, backwards compatibility, etc > Contributions: welcome from anyone based on technical quality > License: Apache License, dependencies must not put additional restrictions > Community: inclusive, meritocratic, no dictators, clear documented path to > entry > Discussions and decisions: asynchronous, in a single central place, > archived > Decision making: consensus, votes if needed, technical vetoes in the worst > case > Independence: from any corporate or organizational influence > Releases: source code only, notices, long-lived release format > How much of this is already covered by the Incubation process? Hopefully projects don't revert to improper licensing or closed development after they graduate. I understand the value of measuring maturity after a project has left the Incubator, but I also don't know that we want to put an additional set of checkboxes on projects. Either you're ready to graduate, or you're not. That comes from having good mentors, I think. Am I missing the intent here? > > Related efforts, inspiration: > > > http://osswatch.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2014/12/11/open-or-fauxpen-use-the-oss-watch-openness-rating-tool-to-find-out/ > > http://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:16 > > -Bertrand >
