wiki:Graduation List

Version 7 (modified by cvvergara, 5 years ago) ( diff )

separating the applicaytion questionaire

OSGeo-Live Incubation Checklist

This page addresses the status of OSGeo-Live as per version 2.0 of the OSGeo Incubation Checklist. It is derived from the Project Graduation Checklist

For the purposes of incubation auditing, the scope of the OSGeo-Live project comprises of the scripts and processes used to build OSGeo-Live, but doesn't include the specific projects being packages (many of which are addressing OSGeo Incubation separately in their own right).

Incubation Checklist


The project has demonstrated that it has an open, active and healthy user and developer community:

  • Open: projects are expected to function in an open and public manner and include:
  • Active and healthy community:
    • The project should have a community of developers and users who actively collaborate and support each other in a healthy way. Eg. collaboration on project activities such as testing, release and feature development.
      • YES: A few hundred people have contributed to OSGeo-Live. Most contributions have been in writing application installer scripts, associated documentation, as well as translations. A list of contributors are at:
    • Long term viability of the project is demonstrated by showing participation and direction from multiple developers, who come from multiple organizations. Eg. The project is resilient enough to sustain loss of a developer or supporting organisation, often referred to as having a high bus factor. Decisions are made openly instead of behind closed doors, which empowers all developers to take ownership of the project and facilitates spreading of knowledge between current and future team members.

Copyright and License

We need to ensure that the project owns or otherwise has obtained the ability to release the project code by completing the following steps:


  • The project has a suitable open governance policy ensuring decisions are made, documented and adhered to in a public manner. This typically means a Project Management Committee has been established with a process for adding new members. A robust Project Management Committee will typically draw upon developers, users and key stakeholders from multiple organizations as there will be a greater variety of technical visions and the project is more resilient to a sponsor leaving.


Release Procedure

In order to maintain a consistent level of quality, the project should follow defined release and testing processes.

  • The project follows a defined release process:
    • Which includes execution of the testing process before releasing a stable release.
    • The project has an established build and release process, but it needs to be more clearly documented. Some information here: . The release management role is well established, but not documented. This includes setting up a schedule, sending out press releases, chasing up projects, etc, etc.
  • The project follows a documented testing process. (Ideally, this includes both automated and manual testing)(Ideally this includes documented conformance to set quality goals, such as reporting Percentage Code Coverage of Unit Tests.)
    • OSGeo-Live is an integration project, which is difficult to create automated testing for. Instead we rely on manual testing. The testing process is well practiced, but needs to be documented better
  • Release and testing processes provide sufficient detail for an experienced programmer to follow.
    • TBD: Waiting on improved documentation.
Note: See TracWiki for help on using the wiki.