[Global_education_committee] Fwd: [Owasp-board] REQUEST FOR DECISION/CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO UPDATE THE ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

Seba seba at owasp.org
Wed Mar 4 10:52:54 EST 2009


Paulo,

yep: I agree

regards

Seba

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Paulo Coimbra <paulo.coimbra at owasp.org>wrote:

>  Hello Sebastion,
>
>
>
> As the criteria are cumulative I think it would be enough to place your
> proposed criterion at the Beta level as it would mean that all Quality
> projects should also comply. Do you agree?
>
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
>
>
> Paulo Coimbra,
>
> OWASP Project Manager <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Main_Page>
>
>
>
> *From:* global_education_committee-bounces at lists.owasp.org [mailto:
> global_education_committee-bounces at lists.owasp.org] *On Behalf Of *Seba
> *Sent:* segunda-feira, 2 de Março de 2009 20:08
> *To:* global_education_committee at lists.owasp.org
> *Subject:* [Global_education_committee] Fwd: [Owasp-board] REQUEST FOR
> DECISION/CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO UPDATE THE ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
>
>
>
> I have added
>
> * 5 slide deck for OWASP Boot Camp project
>
> for everything up from Beta quality
>
> regards
>
>
>
> Seba
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Paulo Coimbra* <paulo.coimbra at owasp.org>
> Date: Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:24 PM
> Subject: [Owasp-board] REQUEST FOR DECISION/CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO
> UPDATE THE ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
> To: OWASP Foundation Board List <owasp-board at lists.owasp.org>,
> global_tools_and_project_committee at lists.owasp.org
>
>   Board, Project’s Committee,
>
>
>
> Please see below and let me know if you think appropriate we send off this
> call for contributions to our leaders’ mailing list. It goes without saying,
> feel free to change it as you find best.
>
>
>
> Many thanks, regards,
>
>
>
> Paulo
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello Leaders,
>
>
>
> I hope you are well.
>
>
>
> You better than anyone else know that OWASP as an organization has been
> built by your continuous open contributions both by defining its mission,
> organizational structure, rules and procedures and by leading the
> application security projects that are its core of activity.
>
>
>
> In my today’s call for contributions, procedures regarding projects
> development’s stage assessment are the main issue.
>
>
>
> As you may know, a system to evaluate OWASP projects is already in use and
> actually consists in both a set of criteria
> http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Category:OWASP_Project_Assessment and a
> skeleton/frame to implement it
> http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Live_CD_2008_Project_-_Assessment_Frame.
>
>
>
> With other few subsequent modifications, this set of criteria has mainly
> resulted of a vigorous discussion held through this mailing list almost a
> year ago and since then it has been used in all newly set up projects.
>
>
>
> Since then this issue has been discussed consecutively in several different
> contexts. In our Summit, for example, even if we haven’t committed a
> specific slot of time to deal with this matter, it has collaterally arisen
> throughout many project’s presentations. In addition, I regularly receive
> from OWASP Board requests to make modifications, a systemic reflection is
> being held within the Project’s Committee and, as result of my daily
> handling of projects under review, I am obtaining some feedback from project
> leaders and reviewers.
>
>
>
> Overall, the people with whom I’ve discussed this issue usually say that
> the procedure can be improved and IMHO they are right.
>
>
>
> From these discussions, I’ve retained that a handful of criteria have been
> proposed but haven’t been implemented yet as forthcoming:
>
> -          OWASP writing style (Tool projects/Release Quality),
>
> -          Translation (Tools and Documentation/Release Quality),
>
> -          Bi-monthly periodic news (Tools and Documentation/non specified
> Quality status),
>
> -          5 slide deck for OWASP Boot Camp project (Tools and
> Documentation/Beta status),
>
> -          Attribution rules (Tools and Documentation/non specified
> Quality status),
>
> -          Compulsory Project Skeleton/Frame (Tools and Documentation/all
> Quality status),
>
> -           Reviewer role - addition and clarification,
>
> http://owaspsoc2008.wordpress.com/2008/07/15/assessment-guidance/
>
> -          Mentor role addition and definition.
>
> In addition, as far as I am concerned, a few more structural comments have
> also been made. Even without pointing out alternative technical solutions,
> at least a  couple of them have questioned the rationale of working with
> tables in wiki text and others have pointed out the willingness of having a
> project’s page similar to, for example, this one http://www.hdiv.org/.
>
>
>
> Having said all the above with the intention of giving you a picture of the
> current situation, I ask for your contribution so as to update the OWASP
> Assessment Criteria.
>
>
>
> In operational terms, I’ve replicated the Assessment Criteria page
> http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Category:OWASP_Project_Assessment_-_Updateand propose you introduce your changes directly on it. As soon as we finish
> the discussion phase, all the contributions will be moved to the original
> wiki page. With the goal of enhancing the discussion, I also propose you use
> this mailing list to inform which changes are being proposed and the reason
> or goal for doing so.
>
>
>
> Please do have into account that you proposals can have implications in the
> assessment frame that we are currently using and, if it happens, please
> present a compatible solution.
>
>
>
> I thank you all in anticipation and look forward to having your
> indispensable feedback.
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Paulo Coimbra,
>
> OWASP Project Manager <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Main_Page>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/global_education_committee/attachments/20090304/b1af2ebf/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Global_education_committee mailing list