Re: [Repo-criteria-discuss] What's needed to publish the evaluations (aka the longest email ever {aka two specific tasks})}

[Zak Rogoff]

Everyone -- Bruno let me know that he wouldn't be able to finish
checking that the evaluations were up to date and publish them, and
unfortunately I don't have the bandwidth to do it now.

If anyone would like to take ownership of this segment of the project,
let me know and I'll work with you to do it. But if not, I'll probably
be able to get to it after our LibrePlanet conference in late March.

I'm pasting the tasks again here below, with the timeline generalized,
for reference:



# Task 1: Get the evaluations ready to publish
The latest draft of the evaluations that I've received is up at
<https://static.fsf.org/nosvn/repo-criteria/eval-page-feb-4-2016.html>
for us to review. Please don't link to it publicly yet.

The task includes:

  * Double-check that the evaluations are still are up to date and send
an email confirming this to the list. If they are not up-to-date, make
sure someone updates them.
  * Add a note to the evaluations page and the evaluations matrix (the
table that summarizes the scores) saying which version of the criteria
was used to evaluated them (we should keep the date of evaluation that's
already there).
  * Ask the list if anyone has already completed a Gitlab evaluation
since Syste and Mike worked on the site. If not, do the evaluation or
work with the list to get it done.
  * Proofread, and send to me CCing the list. I'll ask
Richard and the FSF to review, requesting that they get all requested
changes to me within a week.
  * Make any edits requested by the FSF and Richard, and then, once the
final version of it is approved by the FSF, publish the evaluations page
and add the evaluations matrix to the existing criteria page on gnu.org.
This should probably take no more than a week, and we can actually
publish the announcement for it the next day.

# Task 2: Write a short announcement about the evaluations to go on fsf.org

Anyone who is a strong and experienced writer could do this one. It
should link to the original announcement
(<https://www.fsf.org/news/gnu-ethical-repo-criteria>) and briefly
reiterate its basic points without being repetitive, give an overview of
the evaluation process and call for:
* Repo sites to work on getting an A on the criteria
* Interested people to join this list and help evaluate major code repo
sites, and work with them if needed to improve their evaluations.

This will be edited/added to by me and published as a press release on
fsf.org with your name on it as a guest author. Make sure to review
other press releases in https://www.fsf.org/news and match their style
and format. Give Zak Rogoff as the media contact, like on the original
announcement.

-- 
Zak Rogoff // Campaigns Manager
Free Software Foundation

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature