😉True Open Source Maturity Pilot
This report serves as a baseline for a meticulous situation analysis aimed at identifying and marking key areas for improvement within the Cardano open-source ecosystem.
Report Contents:
This report serves as a baseline for a situation analysis aimed at evaluating and marking key areas for improvement within the Cardano open-source ecosystem. The analysis was conducted through a series of situation use cases, each assessed with a simple pass or fail metric. These assessments provide a comprehensive overview of Cardano's open-source performance on a 14-point scale. PDF Link to detailed report. Google Sheet Results.
General Observations:
This process has established a baseline for Cardano to improve its open-source practice and be rated by the community it is trying to foster whether it is truly open source or not.
Although Cardano passed, there is much more room for improvement and the assessment can be refined further for stronger evaluations.
Assessment Results:
Overall Result: PASS
Resulting Pass Rate: 60%
Letter Grade: D
Use Case Evaluation:
Limited Contributor Engagement: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Test the effectiveness of the onboarding process for new contributor(s). Evaluate the clarity and accessibility of documentation, mentorship availability, and overall onboarding experience to boost contributor engagement.
Given, When, Then: Given a new contributor who has just joined the project,
When they go through the onboarding process, Then, they
find the documentation clear and accessible,
receive adequate mentorship,
have a positive onboarding experience that encourages further engagement
Inefficient Code Contribution Process: (PASS / FAIL): FAIL
Use Case: Test the collaboration workflow by real code contributions. Assess the efficiency of the process, from submission to review and merging, ensuring a smooth and collaborative open-source development environment.
Given, When, Then: Given a contributor ready to submit their code,
When they follow the collaboration workflow,
Then, they
find the process from submission to review and merging efficient and conducive to a smooth open-source development environment.
Unclear Governance Decision-Making: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Simulate a governance decision-making scenario. Test the transparency and inclusivity of the governance mechanisms, including voting processes and community involvement, ensuring clear decision-making pathways.
Given, When, Then: Given a Cardano community member is interested in understanding and potentially participating in the governance process,
When they access and explore the available resources,
Then, they
encounter clear and accessible documentation explaining the governance model,
transparent voting procedures,
opportunities for community feedback and discussion on proposals.
Lack of Diversity in Contributions: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Evaluate the effectiveness of diversity and inclusion initiatives by measuring the increase in contributions from individuals with diverse backgrounds. Test the open-source community's inclusivity regarding gender, ethnicity, and other factors.
Given, When, Then: Given the Cardano project to foster a more diverse and inclusive contributor base,
When diversity and inclusion initiatives are implemented and tracked,
Then the project
sees an increase in contributions from individuals from diverse backgrounds
Communication Channel Ineffectiveness: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Test the communication channels by introducing a hypothetical critical issue. Assess how effectively the channels convey information, facilitate discussion, and resolve concerns among open-source contributors.
Given, When, Then: Given a Cardano contributor encountering a question, concern, or needing information,
When they utilize the established communication channels,
Then, they
receive timely and informative responses
encounter an adequate flow of information within the community,
experience reduced confusion and frustration regarding communication.
Bug Bounty Program Underutilization: (PASS / FAIL): FAIL
Use Case: Simulate the discovery and reporting of a security vulnerability. Evaluate the bug bounty program's responsiveness, effectiveness in identifying issues, and its role in enhancing the overall security posture of Cardano's open-source projects.
Given, When, Then: Given a security researcher with a potential vulnerability identified in a Cardano open-source project,
When they utilize the established bug bounty program to report the vulnerability,
Then, they
encounter a well-defined program with clear guidelines and reward structure
experience efficient and responsive handling of their report
are incentivized to participate further through the program
Documentation Fragmentation: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Test the collaborative features of the documentation platform by having contributors update a section. Assess how easy contributors can provide feedback, suggest edits, and collectively improve project documentation.
Given, When, Then: Given a specific section of Cardano's open-source project documentation that requires improvement.
When contributors are invited to edit, suggest changes, and collaborate on the section through the documentation platform.
Then, the platform
facilitate easy feedback and transparent edits
Ineffective Recognition System: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Introduce a recognition and rewards scenario. Test the functionality and fairness of the recognition system by acknowledging contributors for their specific achievements, ensuring it motivates continued and diverse contributions.
Given, When, Then: Given, a contributor makes a significant contribution to the Cardano project.
When the recognition system identifies and acknowledges their achievement through a reward or public recognition.
Then,
the contributor feels valued and motivated to continue contributing,
the system promotes diverse and sustained contributions.
Lack of Clarity in Governance Model: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Introduce a governance model for projects. Test the functionality and fairness of the governance model by having contributors collaborate with maintainers in a transparent format and have a consensus vote taken for an action.
Given, When, Then: Given a new proposal introduced within the Cardano community.
When discussions and voting occur, contributors clearly understand their roles, decision-making process, and active participation potential.
Then,
the governance model demonstrates transparency and inclusivity
empowers informed participation in shaping the project's direction.
Quality assurance oversight: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Introduce a real code review scenario. Test the integration of quality assurance practices, ensuring that code reviews maintain high standards and contributors actively maintain the quality of Cardano's open-source codebase.
Given, When, Then: Given a contributor submits a code change for the Cardano codebase.
When the code review process thoroughly evaluates it, ensuring alignment with quality standards and best practices.
Then,
contributors actively maintain high code quality,
the process upholds rigorous quality assurance standards.
Ineffective community meetings: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Simulate a community meeting with essential updates. Test the effectiveness of the meeting in disseminating information, addressing concerns, and fostering a sense of community engagement among open-source contributors.
Given, When, Then: Given an upcoming community meeting with essential updates for Cardano project contributors.
When the meeting effectively disseminates information, addresses concerns, and fosters engagement.
Then,
contributors feel informed, heard, and connected to the community
Unclear collaborative roadmap: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Introduce a scenario where contributors express confusion about project direction. Test the collaborative roadmap by evaluating its clarity, alignment with community needs, and transparency in guiding the evolution of the Cardano open-source ecosystem.
Given, When, Then: Given: Contributors expressed confusion about the direction of the Cardano project.
When the collaborative roadmap is reviewed and discussed, its clarity, alignment with community needs, and transparency in guiding the project's evolution are addressed.
Then, the roadmap
is clear, well-aligned with community needs
provides a transparent vision for the Cardano open-source ecosystem's future.
Lack of user feedback integration: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Test the mechanisms for incorporating user feedback. Introduce a user feedback scenario and assess how actively and effectively user perspectives are considered in open-source decision-making and development.
Given, When, Then: Given a user feedback scenario,
When the feedback is incorporated into the project,
Then, user perspectives should be actively and effectively considered in open-source decision-making and development.
Inadequate education and training: (PASS / FAIL): PASS
Use Case: Simulate a scenario where contributors express gaps in skills. Test the effectiveness of education and training programs by evaluating access to resources that enhance contributors' skills and understanding of Cardano's open-source environment.
Given, When, Then: Given a scenario where contributors express gaps in skills,
When they access the project's education and training programs,
Then, they should find the resources helpful in filling their skill gaps and improving their contributions to the project.
Last updated
