Wiki source code of License Review Tool Requirements, Candidates, and Selection
Version 5.1 by vmbrasseur on 2018/06/23 18:50
Show last authors
| author | version | line-number | content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The [[License Review>>url:http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org]] mailing list [[is considering>>url:http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2018-June/003384.html]] using a project management tool for public tracking of the license review process. This page is for collecting information related to this tool selection. | ||
| 2 | |||
| 3 | == Requirements == | ||
| 4 | |||
| 5 | For now, simply list any requirements you believe this tool //should// have. After collecting potential requirements we can categorise them into actual-requirements, nice-to-haves, and not-actually-required. | ||
| 6 | |||
| 7 | |||
| 8 | * Ability to submit a license for review | ||
| 9 | * Being able to immediately identify the current state of review for a license (eg. "approved", "rejected", "new", "brb; being redrafted", "invalid", "rejected", etc.) | ||
| 10 | * Ability to submit updated revisions of a license, without destroying previous ones or history | ||
| 11 | * Ability to comment on a license in a general sense | ||
| 12 | * Ability to comment on specific words/lines of a given draft of license | ||
| 13 | * All comments and submissions are dated and named | ||
| 14 | * Entirely separate discussions for each license | ||
| 15 | * Canonical URIs for each license for review | ||
| 16 | * Not mandatory to use the tool in order to participate in review | ||
| 17 | * Easy to learn/refresh: this will be used intensively, but for many users only once (when they submit a license) or for most, 1-2x a year (current rate of seriously discussed license submisssions). | ||
| 18 | * Low administrative overhead (OSI does not have a good track record of hosting/maintaining new services) | ||
| 19 | |||
| 20 | == Candidates == | ||
| 21 | |||
| 22 | What tools are candidates for this? For now simply list tools without regard to whether they meet requirements, as the requirements are still being collected. Please provide links to tools as applicable. | ||
| 23 | |||
| 24 | * Gitlab (self-hosted, Gitlab.org, etc.) | ||
| 25 | * GitHub (there is already an OSI org at GitHub: https:~/~/github.com/OpenSourceOrg ) | ||
| 26 | * Taiga | ||
| 27 | * Etherpad + similar | ||
| 28 | |||
| 29 | ((( | ||
| 30 | |||
| 31 | ))) |