[Owasp-board] Staring projects - incubators new guidelines, process and rules

Tom Brennan - OWASP tomb at owasp.org
Wed Sep 10 15:02:12 UTC 2014


Nice job!

Tom Brennan
Global Vice Chairman
OWASP Foundation
973-202-0122
tomb at owasp.org | www.owasp.org

On Aug 28, 2014, at 11:19 PM, johanna curiel curiel <johanna.curiel at owasp.org> wrote:

> Yes I think projects should start with at least some code or draft documentation.
> 
> But I think after all the free for all that existed starting projects , we should set the bar higher progressively, as you saw on the same reactions, some people really felt intimidated by this requirement
> 
> By setting higher requirements on roadmap and descriptions, we will filter a group of them, however , by end of the year , as a new set of incubator projects fail to create a release, it will then be clear for everyone that we really need to request a first prototype or draft when lauching a new project. 
> 
> Also the content  of some of these projects, is often less than satisfactory. Some of them are are total puzzle and no wonder why they are not even downloaded or used. Thats also an ingredient for unsustainability.
> 
> This is definetly just the beginning, if we want to improve the quality of projects there is still a lot of work to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thursday, August 28, 2014, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
> Johanna,
> 
> I think your list is quite reasonable from what I have seen on the project list. While you are setting the bar higher that it was before, it's still VERY low for new projects. We want to support innovation and make it easy to get a new project rolling, but after     so much abuse and after so many non-projects were let slip through, I think it's prudent to set the bar a little higher.
> 
> Aloha,
> Jim
> 
> On 8/28/14, 6:30 PM, johanna curiel curiel wrote:
>> Board members and Paul
>> 
>> When Samantha used to work as Project Manager, she was allowed to create and start many incubator projects alone. After reviewing all of them, I see that many projects never really started properly with all the necessary information such as a basic description or a clear roadmap.
>> 
>> The community has also express disagreement on the amount of projects and the incredible low quality of them. We want  quality, sustainable projects, but not half empty wiki pages with no releases.
>> 
>> I don't think OWASP has benefit at all with a humongous incubators list of half empty projects, some of them concerns me because most probably they will fail and die next year
>> 
>> Therefore I don't think we should allow one single person to start new projects without even controlling the content, especially there should be an announcement on the leaders list and allow people to review and feedback before starting it. 
>> 
>> I would like to develop together with the Project review team and Leaders,  a checklist containing the minimum requirements to allow incubator projects to start, which I already did this week and hope to keep developing the coming weeks.
>> 
>>  I don't think OWASP community wants projects appearing as mushrooms in the inventory list, and I think , once again, that starting projects without enough requirements creates confusion and lowers the quality of projects inventory, apart from all the burden to track them and monitor them.
>> 
>> regards
>> 
>> Johanna
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Owasp-board mailing list
>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20140910/d3c030ee/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list