dotnet-foundation/project-maturity-model

Issues

• Is a licensing restriction really needed?

  #16 opened 5 years ago by daveaglick
  7

• Microsoft must not be in the business of telling users which open source is "good" or trustworthy

  #32 opened 5 years ago by Aaronontheweb
  55

• Clarification

  #50 opened 5 years ago by matkoch
  0

• Uses MIT or other compatible license, and third party contributions are documented in a notice file.

  #1 opened 5 years ago by ghuntley
  9

• Commit Signing with GPG or SMIME?

  #20 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  16

• Announcement: Rethinking Project Maturity as a Community Process

  #49 opened 5 years ago by benaadams
  3

• Future .NET Foundation Initiatives

  #48 opened 5 years ago by Aaronontheweb
  9

• Feedback on the proposed model

  #9 opened 5 years ago by JamesRandall
  38

• Identity likely target consumer

  #35 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  13

• Rename "maturity model"

  #47 opened 5 years ago by dustinmoris
  3

• NET Coding guidelines requirement

  #45 opened 5 years ago by isaacabraham
  8

• Clear problem statement

  #44 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  2

• Semver versioning

  #46 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  3

• Question about level 3 acceptance re static analysis

  #22 opened 5 years ago by baronfel
  3

• Reword ladder section to emphasise being lower down is fine

  #26 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  17

• Emphasise early on in the proposal that the .NET Foundation is not Microsoft

  #41 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  0

• Give weight to other software foundations (e.g. CNCF, Apache)

  #43 opened 5 years ago by JamesNK
  1

• Process of evaluation and moving between tiers

  #37 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  2

• Plan for effectively scaling to handle increased service setup

  #23 opened 5 years ago by jongalloway
  3

• Existing policies

  #34 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  1

• How do tooling dependencies apply?

  #33 opened 5 years ago by daveaglick
  2

• Expand requirements with the reason why it is a good practice

  #30 opened 5 years ago by JamesNK
  0

• How should we minimize/eliminate negative impacts to projects that opt out?

  #27 opened 5 years ago by jongalloway
  2

• Public phone call

  #29 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  1

• Badge icons and NuGet

  #6 opened 5 years ago by clairernovotny
  7

• Dispute resolution and support policies

  #13 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  7

• Concerns with the Project Maturity Model

  #14 opened 5 years ago by RLittlesII
  17

• Guidance around level 1 information requirements (contributing, versioning, roadmap)

  #28 opened 5 years ago by JamesNK
  2

• Maturity ladder relationship to community

  #3 opened 5 years ago by daveaglick
  2

• Program clarification

  #4 opened 5 years ago by HurricanKai
  7

• Concerns with Code Signing Requirement

  #18 opened 5 years ago by mitchelsellers
  3

• Update policy process

  #21 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  2

• "Member project of the .NET Foundation" at Level 3 - why?

  #10 opened 5 years ago by shiftkey
  5

• Consider doing a video

  #17 opened 5 years ago by glennawatson
  2

• Questions: The Bogus open-source project

  #8 opened 5 years ago by bchavez
  3

• clarifying "Stable packages depends on libraries that are at level X"

  #12 opened 5 years ago by shiftkey
  2

• re: project forge feedback

  #2 opened 5 years ago by ghuntley
  2