Push for Quality - Revision history

Mtesauro: slight change in wording

2009-04-20T17:53:43Z

slight change in wording

Leocavallari: /* Document Assessment Criteria */

2009-04-16T18:51:41Z

‎Document Assessment Criteria

Leocavallari: /* Document Assessment Criteria */

2009-04-16T18:21:32Z

‎Document Assessment Criteria

Leocavallari at 18:19, 16 April 2009

2009-04-16T18:19:54Z

Leocavallari at 11:39, 16 April 2009

2009-04-16T11:39:58Z

Mtesauro: /* Beta Quality Document Criteria */

2009-03-30T22:16:58Z

‎Beta Quality Document Criteria

Mtesauro: /* Prerequisites for project assessment */

2009-03-30T22:13:08Z

‎Prerequisites for project assessment

Mtesauro: Added Docuement criteria - Alpha, Beta, Release

2009-03-30T21:44:58Z

Added Docuement criteria - Alpha, Beta, Release

Mtesauro: Added Release Quality Tool criteria

2009-03-30T21:19:16Z

Added Release Quality Tool criteria

Mtesauro: /* Beta Quality Tool Criteria */

2009-03-30T21:08:00Z

‎Beta Quality Tool Criteria

@@ Line 158: / Line 158: @@
 Reviewer Action Items:
-#Is the document considering the [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Writing_Style OWASP Writing Style]?
+#Does the document consider the [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Writing_Style OWASP Writing Style]?
 #Do contents from wiki articles match compiled document?
 #Does the document have an “About This Document” section which allows the end user to get an overview of the state of the document?

@@ Line 133: / Line 133: @@
 Pre-Assessment Checklist:
-#Is your document licensed under an open source license? (see Project Licensing section of the [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Guidelines_for_OWASP_Projects Guidelines for OWASP Projects])
+#Is your document licensed under a free and open license? (see Project Licensing section of the [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Guidelines_for_OWASP_Projects Guidelines for OWASP Projects])
 #Is the Project Identification template on the project wiki page complete and accurate?
 #Is the document compiled into an exported (PDF) and editable (.Doc) format available on-line?
-#Are all articles that constitute the project properly tagged within project category and available from main project Wiki page? – ‘’’Leo: I believe it’s good to have all project’s contents in the wiki, not only one-piece document.’’’
+#Are all articles that constitute the project properly tagged within project category and available from main project Wiki page? ('''NOTE: Leo: I believe it’s good to have all project’s contents in the wiki, not only one-piece document.''')
 #Is there an OWASP mail list for the project?
 #Is there a statement of the application security issue the document addresses on the OWASP project wiki page?

@@ Line 145: / Line 145: @@
 Pre-Assessment Checklist:
 #Are all document contents (articles) present and listed on the OWASP project wiki page?
-#Is there an “About This Document” section in the document listing: (NOTE: Leo - Need to create a general template to be used by all docs projects while Ivan Ristic’s proposal is still under elaboration/evaluation)
+#Is there an “About This Document” section in the document listing: ('''NOTE: Leo - Need to create a general template to be used by all docs projects while Ivan Ristic’s proposal is still under elaboration/evaluation''')
 ##Document Name
 ##Author(s)
-##Contributor(s) (NOTE: Leo - How is this going with the sponsorship model (company and names))
+##Contributor(s) ('''NOTE: Leo - How is this going with the sponsorship model (company and names)''')
 ##Contact email address
 ##Current version and/or release date
-##Project's web page address (NOTE: Leo - This should exactly match the Wiki project page)
+##Project's web page address ('''NOTE: Leo - This should exactly match the Wiki project page''')
 #Is the document compiled into an exported (PDF) and editable (.Doc) format available on-line?
 #Are all articles that constitute the project properly tagged within project category and available from main project Wiki page? – ‘’’Leo: I believe it’s good to have all project’s contents in the wiki, not only one-piece document.’’’
@@ Line 167: / Line 167: @@
 Pre-Assessment Checklist:
 #Have any limitations been documented?
-#Is there a conference style presentation that describes the tool in at least 3 slides?
+#Is there a conference style presentation that describes the document in at least 3 slides?
 #Is there a one sheet overview document about the project?
 #Does the document considering [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Writing_Style OWASP Writing Style] and OWASP Template for Docs?

@@ Line 133: / Line 133: @@
 Pre-Assessment Checklist:
-# Is your document licensed under an open source license? (see Project Licensing section of the [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Guidelines_for_OWASP_Projects Guidelines for OWASP Projects])
+#Is your document licensed under an open source license? (see Project Licensing section of the [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Guidelines_for_OWASP_Projects Guidelines for OWASP Projects])
-# Is the following present on the OWASP project wiki page:
+#Is the Project Identification template on the project wiki page complete and accurate?
-## Description of the document
+#Is the document compiled into an exported (PDF) and editable (.Doc) format available on-line?
-## Project leader information
+#Are all articles that constitute the project properly tagged within project category and available from main project Wiki page? – ‘’’Leo: I believe it’s good to have all project’s contents in the wiki, not only one-piece document.’’’
-## Contact information
+#Is there an OWASP mail list for the project?
-## A list of contributors or company logo/name if a team effort ('''NOTE:''' How is this going with the sponsorship model? - from Leo)
+#Is there a statement of the application security issue the document addresses on the OWASP project wiki page?
-## A roadmap or timeline listing the steps to achieve the purpose of the project
 ====Beta Quality Document Criteria====
 Pre-Assessment Checklist:
-# Are all document contents (articles) present and listed on the OWASP project wiki page?
+#Are all document contents (articles) present and listed on the OWASP project wiki page?
-# Is there an “About” section or similar item in the document which lists: ('''NOTE:''' Is there a general template/structure for docs? - from Leo)
+#Is there an “About This Document” section in the document listing: (NOTE: Leo - Need to create a general template to be used by all docs projects while Ivan Ristic’s proposal is still under elaboration/evaluation)
-## Document Name
+##Document Name
-## Author(s)
+##Author(s)
-## Contributor(s)
+##Contributor(s) (NOTE: Leo - How is this going with the sponsorship model (company and names))
-## Contact email address
+##Contact email address
-## Current version and/or release data
+##Current version and/or release date
-## Project's web page address ('''NOTE:''' Should this exactly match the template material - from Leo)
+##Project's web page address (NOTE: Leo - This should exactly match the Wiki project page)
-# Is the tool documentation stored in the same repository as the source code? ('''NOTE:'''  Think this is a copy/paste error --[[User:Mtesauro|Mtesauro]] 21:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC))
+#Is the document compiled into an exported (PDF) and editable (.Doc) format available on-line?
 Reviewer Action Items:
-# Is the document considering the [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Writing_Style OWASP Writing Style]?
+#Is the document considering the [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Writing_Style OWASP Writing Style]?
-# Does the tool have an “About box” or similar help item which allows the end user to get an overview of the state of this tool? Is this information readily available and easy to find? ('''NOTE:'''  Think this is a copy/paste error --[[User:Mtesauro|Mtesauro]] 21:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC))
+#Do contents from wiki articles match compiled document?
-# Is the tools documentation available with the source code and would it readily discoverable by a new user of the tool? ('''NOTE:'''  Think this is a copy/paste error --[[User:Mtesauro|Mtesauro]] 21:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC))
+#Does the document have an “About This Document” section which allows the end user to get an overview of the state of the document?
 ====Release Quality Document Criteria====
 Pre-Assessment Checklist:
-# Have any limitations been documented?
+#Have any limitations been documented?
-# Is there a conference style presentation that describes the tool in at least 3 slides?
+#Is there a conference style presentation that describes the tool in at least 3 slides?
-# Is there a one sheet overview document about the project?
+#Is there a one sheet overview document about the project?
-# Is the document respecting [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Writing_Style OWASP Writing Style] and OWASP Template for Docs?
+#Does the document considering [http://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Writing_Style OWASP Writing Style] and OWASP Template for Docs?
-# Are the Alpha and Beta pre-assessment items complete?
+#Is there a one sheet overview document about the project?
 Reviewer Action Items:
-# Does the document substantially address the application security issue(s) it was created to solve?
+#Does the document substantially address the application security issues it was created to solve?
-# Verify grammar, writing style and document template compliance.
+#Does the document respecting OWASP Writing Style and OWASP Template for Docs?
-# Have you noted any limitations of the document that are not already documented by the project lead.
+#Have you noted any limitations of the document that are not already documented by the project lead.
-# Have all the Beta Reviewer Action Items been completed?  These will need to be completed if they have not already occurred during a previous assessment.
+#Have all the Beta Reviewer Action Items been completed? These will need to be completed if they have not already occurred during a previous assessment.

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 For project deliverables, OWASP has established the assessment criteria with three designations of quality:  Alpha, Beta and Release.  As project deliverables move up the quality ladder from Alpha to Beta and finally to Release quality, the amount of rigor required increases. In general, the project lead will determine the goal quality level of their project and work towards fulfilling the criteria for that level. Once a project lead has completed the prerequisites and criteria for the goal level, they request that their project be reviewed. The level will determine who and how those reviews occur.
-* Alpha quality: The review consists of the Global Project Committee (GPC) verifying that the project pre-assessment check-list is complete. Apha projects are the most free and open since anyone with solution to an application security problem can propose a new OWASP project. Alpha is where all new projects begin.
+* Alpha quality: The review consists of the Global Project Committee (GPC) verifying that the project pre-assessment check-list is complete. Alpha projects are the most free and open since anyone with solution to an application security problem can propose a new OWASP project. Alpha is where all new projects begin.
 * Beta quality: The review will first be conducted by the project's reviewer (more on this below). After the reviewer completes the reviewer action items, the GPC will validate the project's assessment.
 * Release quality: The two project reviewers will complete their action items (more on this below). After the reviews are complete, the Global Projects Committee and OWASP Board will validate the project's review.

@@ Line 70: / Line 70: @@
 * If the project lead is unable to find the required reviewer(s), the Global Projects Committee can assist in identifying reviewers for the project.
 * It is recommended that an OWASP board member or Global Projects Committee member be the second reviewer on Release quality deliverables. The board has the initial option to review a project, followed by the Global Projects Committee.
-* The OWASP board reserves the right to deny the appointment of any reviewer.
+* The Global Projects Committee confirms the assignment of reviewers to a project.
 ===Tool Assessment Criteria===

@@ Line 72: / Line 72: @@
 * The OWASP board reserves the right to deny the appointment of any reviewer.
-===Tools Assessment Criteria===
+===Tool Assessment Criteria===
 ====Alpha Quality Tool Criteria====
@@ Line 91: / Line 91: @@
 ## Project Name
 ## Short Description
-## Project Lead
+## Project Lead and contact information (e.g. email address)
 ## Project Contributors (if any)
 ## License
@@ Line 126: / Line 126: @@
 # Is the bug tracking system usable? Is it hosted at the same place as the source code? (e.g. Google Code, Sourceforge)
 # Have you noted any limitations of the tool that are not already documented by the project lead.
 # Have all the Beta Reviewer Action Items been completed?  These will need to be completed if they have not already occurred during a previous assessment.

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 This page is maintained by the [[Global Projects Committee]] to help assist Project Leaders with information about successfully running an OWASP Project. It will be updated from time to time, and changes will be discussed and announced on the OWASP-Leaders list.
 ===Overview===
@@ Line 108: / Line 109: @@
 ====Release Quality Tool Criteria====

@@ Line 95: / Line 95: @@
 ## Project Sponsors (if any)
 ## Release status and date assessed as Month-Year e.g. March 2009
-## Link to OWASP Project Page (unsure if this is needed --[[User:Mtesauro|Mtesauro]] 21:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC))
+## Link to OWASP Project Page ('''NOTE:''' I am unsure if this is needed --[[User:Mtesauro|Mtesauro]] 21:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC))
 # Is there documentation on how to build the tool from source including obtaining the source from the code repository?
 # Is the tool documentation stored in the same repository as the source code?