...
| Project A | |||
| Criteria | Result / Proof point | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Public version-controlled source repository | |||
The project MUST have a version-controlled source repository that is publicly readable and has a URL. | yes | Scope of the near-RT RIC platform and its components (summary) | |
The project's source repository MUST track what changes were made, who made the changes, and when the changes were made. | yes | Scope of the near-RT RIC platform and its components (summary) | |
To enable collaborative review, the project's source repository MUST include interim versions for review between releases; it MUST NOT include only final releases. | yes | Scope of the near-RT RIC platform and its components (summary) | |
It is SUGGESTED that common distributed version control software be used (e.g., git) for the project's source repository. | yes | Scope of the near-RT RIC platform and its components (summary) | |
Unique version numbering | |||
The project results MUST have a unique version identifier for each release intended to be used by users | yes | ||
It is SUGGESTED that the Semantic Versioning (SemVer) format be used for releases. | yes | ||
It is SUGGESTED that projects identify each release within their version control system. For example, it is SUGGESTED that those using git identify each release using git tags. | yes | named branches | |
Release notes | |||
[release_notes] The project MUST provide, in each release, release notes that are a human-readable summary of major changes in that release to help users determine if they should upgrade and what the upgrade impact will be. The release notes MUST NOT be the raw output of a version control log (e.g., the "git log" command results are not release notes). Projects whose results are not intended for reuse in multiple locations (such as the software for a single website or service) AND employ continuous delivery MAY select "N/A". (URL required) | partial (fix-priority low) | by repo, but not all repos have release notes. Good example: https://docs.o-ran-sc.org/projects/o-ran-sc-ric-plt-lib-rmr/en/latest/rel-notes.html | Governance 2021-02-19 Create a release checklist comprising of this & few other from this page. Did every component update their rst release notes & did PTL summarized those on one wiki page ? |
[release_notes_vulns] The release notes MUST identify every publicly known vulnerability with a CVE assignment or similar that is fixed in each new release, unless users typically cannot practically update the software themselves. If there are no release notes or there have been no publicly known vulnerabilities, choose "not applicable" (N/A). | no (fix-priority low) | Governance/Technical 2021-02-19 For own source-code bugs this can be handled manually as part of release checklist (If JIRA based security bug has been created) But for containers we should find a technical solution (automated) involving some tool e.g. docker image scanning tool (LFN provided preferred) | |
Reporting (8 Points)
(Result/Proof point (column A: enter Met/Unmet; Column B: enter relevant URLs/comments)
| near-RT RIC (end of Cherry) | |||
| Criteria | Result / Proof point | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Bug-reporting process | |||
| The project MUST provide a process for users to submit bug reports (e.g., using an issue tracker or a mailing list). (URL required) | yes | Tools (mailing list, JIRA, Gerrit) | |
| The project SHOULD use an issue tracker for tracking individual issues. | yes | Tools (mailing list, JIRA, Gerrit) | |
| The project MUST acknowledge a majority of bug reports submitted in the last 2-12 months (inclusive); the response need not include a fix. | yes | TODO | |
| The project SHOULD respond to a majority (>50%) of enhancement requests in the last 2-12 months (inclusive). | yes | TODO | |
| [report_archive] The project MUST have a publicly available archive for reports and responses for later searching. (URL required) | no (fix-priority low) | Governance 2021-02-19 Depends on previous two criterion As part of release checklist store the snapshot copy of the reports of previous two criterion into wiki page. RC-3 in Release criteria checklist template | |
Vulnerability report process | |||
| The project MUST publish the process for reporting vulnerabilities on the project site. (URL required) | yes | Governance 2021-02-19 Tools (mailing list, JIRA, Gerrit) Jira issues will need to be labelled for security bugs. | |
If private vulnerability reports are supported, the project MUST include how to send the information in a way that is kept private. (URL required) Examples include a private defect report submitted on the web using HTTPS (TLS) or an email encrypted using OpenPGP. If vulnerability reports are always public (so there are never private vulnerability reports), choose "not applicable" (N/A). | NA | Governance 2021-02-19 NA (We don't support private vulnerability) | |
[vulnerability_report_response] The project's initial response time for any vulnerability report received in the last 6 months MUST be less than or equal to 14 days. If there have been no vulnerabilities reported in the last 6 months, choose "not applicable" (N/A). | no (fix-priority low) | Governance 2021-02-19 JIRA Report & Release checklist as criteria | |
Quality (13 Points)
(Result/Proof point (column A: enter Met/Unmet; Column B: enter relevant URLs/comments)
...