Difference between revisions of "ERC/Notabug"
From LibrePlanet
Bill-auger (talk | contribs) (initial data) |
Bill-auger (talk | contribs) m (Bill-auger moved page Notabug to ERC/Notabug: group with the others) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
|B1= | |B1= | ||
|B2= | |B2= | ||
| + | |B2-0=no licensing documentation | ||
| + | |B2-1=no licensing documentation | ||
|B3= | |B3= | ||
|A0= | |A0= | ||
| Line 26: | Line 28: | ||
|A7= | |A7= | ||
|A8= | |A8= | ||
| − | |A9= | + | |A9=no such requirement |
|A-plus-0=TODO | |A-plus-0=TODO | ||
|A-plus-1=TODO | |A-plus-1=TODO | ||
| Line 33: | Line 35: | ||
|A-plus-4=TODO | |A-plus-4=TODO | ||
|A-plus-5=FAIL - no API or export functionality - although, users may request a raw DB dump, at the admin's discretion; i don't believe that satisfies this criteria | |A-plus-5=FAIL - no API or export functionality - although, users may request a raw DB dump, at the admin's discretion; i don't believe that satisfies this criteria | ||
| + | |A-plus-6=no licensing documentation | ||
| + | |A-plus-7=No, A+7 is something of an ideal. It would take a lot of work for any forge. | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | |||
| + | Evaluations: | ||
| + | * 2016-04 - https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/repo-criteria-discuss/2016-04/msg00077.html | ||
| + | * 2021-03 - https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/repo-criteria-discuss/2021-03/msg00052.html | ||
Latest revision as of 22:06, 16 April 2024
This is the GNU Ethical Repository Criteria Evaluations (ERC) evaluation checklist for Notabug, as compiled by the Community Workgroup for Libre Forge Software and Ethical Repository Hosts. The text of each criteria in the checklist table is a hyper-link to the relevant section of the ERC. Please send any questions or comments to the repo-criteria-discuss mailing list.
Evaluations:
