Re: Draft criteria for passing+1 and pasing+2 - comments?


David A. Wheeler
 

I think the normal meaning for “majority” is “more than 50%”, but we can say that directly.

 

Of course, the other question is, “is that the ‘right’ criterion in the first place?”

 

--- David A. Wheeler

 

 

From: Mark Rader [mailto:msrader@...]
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2017 11:38 PM
To: Wheeler, David A
Cc: cii-badges@...
Subject: Re: [CII-badges] Draft criteria for passing+1 and pasing+2 - comments?

 

David

 

While browsing through the list this just caught my eye.

 

Upgrade: Reporting

  • Upgrade
    • enhancement_responses: SHOULD to MUST. "The project MUST respond to a majority of enhancement requests in the last 2-12 months (inclusive)."

Ok, what do we mean by most?  50.1%, 99.9% there is a lot of wiggle room with "majority".

 

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Wheeler, David A <dwheeler@...> wrote:

We have an updated draft set of criteria for “passing+1” and “passing+2”:

  https://github.com/linuxfoundation/cii-best-practices-badge/blob/master/doc/other.md

 

These are *not* the final product – but I’d really like to hear comments about them.

 

I really want to make it *possible* for small projects to get higher-level badges, but clearly *some* activities that reduce risk for users *do* require more people (e.g., for multi-person review, bus factor, etc.).  The current draft attempts to make passing+1 possible for small projects, while passing+2 includes criteria that help a project but are not practical for small projects.  Well, that was the idea anyway.

 

--- David A. Wheeler

 


_______________________________________________
CII-badges mailing list
CII-badges@...
https://lists.coreinfrastructure.org/mailman/listinfo/cii-badges

 

Join CII-badges@lists.coreinfrastructure.org to automatically receive all group messages.