@Stefan There were specific ones for trademark, people wanted to talk names. And I didn't want to derail that one.
Did you see one specific for graphics?
@Stefan Ah I see them now. Oops. Oh well, I'm sure it'll shake itself out. Thanks for the pointers 😃
@Stefan I think they will. You don't need tons of people to make a fork work practically. Inkscape is a fork (of a fork) and it's worked out. But it took time, and effort.
Being distinctive will be good. Especially in features.
We need a non profit, legally protected certification for projects following defined best practices.Things like community governance, copyleft licensing, no evil CLA's etc. People look for the phrase "Open Source" as a sign of trust worthiness, but it isn't enough (see #ownCloud #Audacity #Freenode etc etc etc). I'd love to see at a glance that a project is safe to contribute to. Maybe it could be called something like "Libre Community Project."?
@Blort All systems will be hacked. It's part of the nature of the human condition to make imperfect machines which eventually fail.
You're talking about branding the actual system. Although to be fair to Free Software, the GPL is doing exactly what it's supposed to do in this case for copyright. Perhaps what we need is a System of best "Trademark" related licensing.
@doctormo Agreed that no guidelines make systems unhackable (technically or politically). As you say, this is more about branding.
I also agree re the GPL. It's an important part of a good system. It's just not the entire system. I'd just like to see projects that have a healthy, robust system be more easily differentiated from projects with lousy protections (eg monolithic governance,single source funding,CLA's that can convert to proprietary,encouraging centralization etc)
Not sure. I tried to look at which best practices they're recognizing, only to be asked to login in with a GitHub account to see them or get a badge. To be fair there was an option to create an account with an email to see the proposals, but still... not sure if this should really be the standards bearer for #FOSS best practices...
Actually, I found another link that goes into their recommendations and isn't behind an account wall. There are a bunch of good guidelines in there relating to the code, but they seem to ignore many of the more important social protections. For example, there's no discussion of #CLA's or #governance at all.
A decent start though, although I'd still like to see the possibility to use it without an account, especially primarily recommending one from #Github.
You probably found the link to their "Passing"-level criteria, which is indeed mostly about code. The full list for all levels is available at https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/en/criteria The "Silver" level does mention CLAs and governance, and the "Gold" level goes into stuff like bus factor, reproducible builds and more. That page doesn't require an account, and is only two clicks away from the front page that I linked earlier. But the links are all inside the text, so it takes a moment to find, I'd grant you that.
All the site does is publish the criteria, collect responses, and produce nice badges for READMEs. If you can live without being in their database, and are willing to produce a badge yourself, you can just take the criteria, put them into a file in your repo, and claim that you meet this, that, and those ones, achieving so-and-so percent conformance. It's not a walled garden.
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!