Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Close out adjustments to OpenSSF Best Practices badge in lifecycle stage requirements. #502

Closed
2 tasks done
jmertic opened this issue Sep 27, 2023 · 8 comments
Closed
2 tasks done
Assignees
Labels
3-tac-meeting-long Longer agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 30 minutes )

Comments

@jmertic
Copy link
Contributor

jmertic commented Sep 27, 2023

Please share any additional details on this topic

As proposed by Jonathan Stone on the #tac channel in the ASWF Slack.... ( https://academysoftwarefdn.slack.com/archives/CKB8RR3FT/p1695761680176419 )

Hello all!
John Mertic and I have been discussing the pros and cons of requiring Silver and Gold OpenSSF badges for ASWF project graduation, and this seems like a topic that is interesting enough to open up for broader discussion.
Based on our conversation so far, here are some of the reasons that we might consider changing our lifecycle rules, maintaining Silver and Gold badges as aspirational goals for all ASWF projects, but not using them as blockers for project graduation:
No ASWF project has ever achieved either a Silver or Gold badge, including the foundational computer graphics projects that launched with the ASWF itself.
Our most recent graduating projects were approved unanimously without achieving either a Silver or Gold badge.
Outside of the ASWF, none of the foundational OSS projects in computer graphics (e.g. PBRT, Mitsuba, Embree, OpenUSD, Filament) has ever achieved either a Silver or Gold badge, and there's no evidence that they're currently pursuing them. One potential reason for this is the disconnect between the focus of the Silver and Gold badges (security guarantees, statement and branch coverage), and the emphasis of computer graphics projects on visual parity and visual regression testing.
We'd be very interested in additional thoughts from this group, and this could be a good discussion topic for a future TAC meeting.

Detail what actions or feedback you would like from the TAC

Discussion on how to proceed

How much time do you need for this topic?

At least 30 minutes

Tasks

Preview Give feedback
  1. 4-tac-meeting-short
@jmertic jmertic added 3-tac-meeting-long Longer agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 30 minutes ) and removed meeting-agenda labels Oct 2, 2023
@jmertic jmertic moved this from Upcoming Meeting Agenda Items to Next Meeting Agenda Items in Academy Software Foundation TAC Meeting Agenda Oct 4, 2023
@jmertic jmertic moved this from Next Meeting Agenda Items to Upcoming Meeting Agenda Items in Academy Software Foundation TAC Meeting Agenda Oct 4, 2023
@jmertic
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmertic commented Oct 5, 2023

Analysis of OpenEXR and OSL where they haven't completed requirements.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bEacUNFizeT8QtfsvqiRNNgvty8_tweHjassHko6OhQ/edit?usp=sharing

@jmertic jmertic moved this from Upcoming Meeting Agenda Items to Next Meeting Agenda Items in Academy Software Foundation TAC Meeting Agenda Oct 23, 2023
@jmertic jmertic moved this from Next Meeting Agenda Items to Future Meeting Agenda Items in Academy Software Foundation TAC Meeting Agenda Nov 6, 2023
@jmertic jmertic moved this from Future Meeting Agenda Items to Next Meeting Agenda Items in Academy Software Foundation TAC Meeting Agenda Nov 9, 2023
@jmertic jmertic moved this from Next Meeting Agenda Items to Upcoming Meeting Agenda Items in Academy Software Foundation TAC Meeting Agenda Nov 27, 2023
@jmertic
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmertic commented Nov 30, 2023

Two takeaways from the TAC Meeting:

  1. Adjust the requirements to reflect progress towards badges, and then put in the following annual review that they should be completed. See proposal in Adjust requirements for the OpenSSF Badge at the Adopted Stage #556.
  2. More tactical guidance on how to complete the requirements. Started work in Update the Best Practices Page with spots for detailed instructions on how to fulfill each requirement #557.

Thank you all for the great discussion!

@jmertic
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmertic commented Dec 5, 2023

@jmertic
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmertic commented Dec 15, 2023

Discussion from 12/13 TAC Meeting:

  • Plan is to determine which Silver/Gold requirements are unclear or problematic, and remove them from the TAC requirements for the Adopted Stage until the requirement is made clear and the concerns addressed.
  • For the 1/10 TAC Meeting, we will review those identified to be potentially problematic for the TAC to consider and approve.
  • After that, work in the CI WG to determine the specific concerns with the problematic requirements, and then work to (a) get clarity and upstream that into the Best Practices Badge project and/or (b) provide ASWF-specific guidance to complete.

@jmertic
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmertic commented Jan 5, 2024

Hi everyone!

Follow up as a prep for Wednesday's meeting:

  1. I've analyzed the badge completion per project, using scoring to determine the most problematic requirements. See this at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bEacUNFizeT8QtfsvqiRNNgvty8_tweHjassHko6OhQ/edit#gid=67150143. Note this data is pulled via the REST API of the BadgeApp, so projects if you want to update your badges those changes should reflect in semi-realtime.
  2. I've dumped the complete badge requirements for all levels with details in a doc at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IgE_Jaeb0Yar_Dc_iCw5FUo_AFJZiIVdDBTxhY-9Vvs/edit?usp=sharing. Please review and add comments on sections that are unclear or problematic.

Thank you all, and I look forward to discussing this more on Wednesday!

@jmertic jmertic added 4-tac-meeting-short Short agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 5 minutes or less ) and removed 3-tac-meeting-long Longer agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 30 minutes ) labels Jan 10, 2024
@jmertic jmertic moved this from Upcoming Meeting Agenda Items to Next Meeting Agenda Items in Academy Software Foundation TAC Meeting Agenda Jan 11, 2024
@jmertic jmertic moved this from Next Meeting Agenda Items to Upcoming Meeting Agenda Items in Academy Software Foundation TAC Meeting Agenda Jan 11, 2024
@jmertic
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmertic commented Jan 11, 2024

Ask for @bcipriano, @carolalynn22, @kmuseth, @reinecke, @fpsunflower, and @jstone-lucasfilm - please review the Silver and Gold badge requirements for your projects. I've added direct links to the badgeapp for each of your projects in the headers for the Google Sheet

@jmertic jmertic added 3-tac-meeting-long Longer agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 30 minutes ) 4-tac-meeting-short Short agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 5 minutes or less ) and removed 4-tac-meeting-short Short agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 5 minutes or less ) 3-tac-meeting-long Longer agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 30 minutes ) labels Jan 12, 2024
@jmertic
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmertic commented Jan 31, 2024

Somewhat related, but there is work to bring the badge management more into project workflows and not entirely within a disconnected app.

coreinfrastructure/best-practices-badge#2094

@jmertic jmertic added 3-tac-meeting-long Longer agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 30 minutes ) and removed 4-tac-meeting-short Short agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 5 minutes or less ) labels Mar 5, 2024
@jmertic jmertic changed the title Discuss use of OpenSSF Best Practices badge in lifecycle stage requirements. Close out adjustments to OpenSSF Best Practices badge in lifecycle stage requirements. Mar 5, 2024
@jmertic
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmertic commented Mar 16, 2024

Closing this as we will align on closing out with the language in #556

@jmertic jmertic closed this as completed Mar 16, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
3-tac-meeting-long Longer agenda item for the TAC meeting ( 30 minutes )
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants