Summary

• Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
4	4
5	5	* Identify an appropriate license-review vehicle with the below attributes
6	6	* Implement the vehicle on an OSI-approved host
	7	+* Document the expected process for reviewing a license and the roles of all participants in the process
7	7	* Document the solution and any maintenance tasks so they can be handed off to a new maintainer
8	8	* Evaluate feasibility of creating a complete, searchable database of all license-review emails, either incorporated into the tool or separate from the tool (currently emails are at at least three different urls)
9	9
...	...	@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
24	24	* Ability to comment on specific sections/words/lines of a given draft of license
25	25	* Ability to comment on a license generally
26	26	* Ability to moderate discussions (including removing comments, editing comments, banning users)
	28	+* Ability to close the process with the publication of an accompanying rationale document
27	27	* Discussions must be publicly accessible, without authentication
28	28	* Users must authenticate and maintain a consistent identity in order to comment/participate in the process
29	29	* Time-stamping of all comments and submissions
...	...	@@ -39,10 +39,12 @@
39	39	==== Nice to have ====
40	40
41	41	* Ability to cross-reference a different comment in the same or different discussion
	44	+* Searchable discussions
42	42	* Canonical URIs for each license for review
43	43	* Machine-readable output from the license review process (text of the license + metadata such as Author, Date approved, Link to discussion, etc.)
44	44	* Low administrative overhead/hosted service (OSI does not have a good track record of hosting/maintaining new services)
45	45	* Previous license review emails can be added so that all license reviews are in the same place (we may need to engage someone separately to complete a migration)
	49	+* Badges to easily identify participants to provide context (e.g. OSI board members, long-time community participants, etc.)
46	46	* Not mandatory to use the tool in order to participate in review, i.e., system integrates with an email workflow
47	47
48	48	(((