Activity

1. spier

   added

   community metricsMetrics about the health and growth of the community of people contributing to our patterns.Metrics about the health and growth of the community of people contributing to our patterns.

   on Nov 29, 2023
2. github-actions commented on Dec 1, 2023

   

   github-actionsbot

   on Dec 1, 2023 – with GitHub Actions

   More actions

   i18n Contents Consistency Issue

   The following files may have consistency issues with the English version. Please check and update the files.

   This issue is created when any of the English patterns have changed (in folder ). It compares the git update history to let you know what updates are overdue. The issue should be closed when the update is complete.

   Maturity Model (patterns/2-structured/maturity-model.md)

   For more information, please compare the original file(en) with the translated file. You can view the differences on GitHub. The number of days since overdue updates is 6 days.

   # diff --git a/patterns/2-structured/maturity-model.md b/patterns/2-structured/maturity-model.md
   # index 8e41062..629c2e4 100644
   # --- a/patterns/2-structured/maturity-model.md
   # +++ b/patterns/2-structured/maturity-model.md
   @@ -213,6 +213,7 @@ long term.
    * Entelgy
    * Zylk
    * Bitergia
   +* Airbus
    
    ## Authors
    

   Repository Activity Score (patterns/2-structured/repository-activity-score.md)

   For more information, please compare the original file(en) with the translated file. You can view the differences on GitHub. The number of days since overdue updates is 6 days.

   # diff --git a/patterns/2-structured/repository-activity-score.md b/patterns/2-structured/repository-activity-score.md
   # index c7d6990..27421a6 100644
   # --- a/patterns/2-structured/repository-activity-score.md
   # +++ b/patterns/2-structured/repository-activity-score.md
   @@ -115,6 +115,7 @@ The repository activity score is a simple calculation based on the GitHub API. I
    ## Known Instances
    
    * Used in SAP's InnerSource project portal to define the default order of the InnerSource projects. It was first created in July 2020 and is fine-tuned and updated frequently ever since. When proposed to the InnerSource Commons in July 2020, this pattern emerged. Also see [Michael Graf & Harish B (SAP) at ISC.S11 - The Unexpected Path of Applying InnerSource Patterns](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r9QOw9dcQo&list=PLCH-i0B0otNQZQt_QzGR9Il_kE4C6cQRy&index=6).
   +* Airbus took a lot of inspiration from this pattern to create an "InnerSource score" that combines the activity score together with checks from the [Standard Base Documentation](./project-setup/base-documentation.md) and the [InnerSource License](./innersource-license.md).
    
    ## Status
    

   InnerSource License (patterns/2-structured/innersource-license.md)

   For more information, please compare the original file(en) with the translated file. You can view the differences on GitHub. The number of days since overdue updates is 6 days.

   # diff --git a/patterns/2-structured/innersource-license.md b/patterns/2-structured/innersource-license.md
   # index 54b5c55..169ea8a 100644
   # --- a/patterns/2-structured/innersource-license.md
   # +++ b/patterns/2-structured/innersource-license.md
   @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ At the time of sharing the source code, it can not be reliably predicted what th
    - Freedom over using the software leads to competition, and spread of ownership
    - There are legal contracts in place which cover the sharing of source code. These contracts are not standardized, so they create additional effort in negotiating and understanding for every project. The existing contracts may also not allow sharing source code in an open enough sense to support a true InnerSource approach.
    - Alternatively, there are no legal contracts in place but source code is shared informally. That might create uncertainty in cases where clarity about ownership and rights and obligations is needed.
   +- Choosing a restrictive and/or copyleft license can constitute a barrier for InnerSource adoption. Specifically, limiting publication to the organisation might require a costly relicensing procedure prior to transitioning to Open Source.
    
    ## Solutions
    
   @@ -51,6 +52,12 @@ The license simplifies the conversations within our organization about sharing s
    
    ## Known Instances
    
   +- **DB Systel**
   +- **Robert Bosch GmbH**
   +- **Airbus**
   +
   +## DB Systel
   +
    DB Systel created their own InnerSource License, see [DB Inner Source License][db-inner-source-license]. They used the [EUPL][eupl], as that offered an open source like starting point, and then worked out the constraints and additional rules required in their specific organizational context.
    
    The first legal entities (companies) within the DB AG are using their InnerSource License.
   @@ -66,6 +73,8 @@ The mentioned collaboration challenges include:
    
    It is worth mentioning that so far the software shared under this InnerSource license is mostly tooling, infrastructure, and tools lower in the stack.
    
   +## Airbus
   +
    Airbus created ad hoc InnerSource licenses to enable InnerSource way of working within a large part of the group.
    
    ## Status

   Dedicated Community Leader (patterns/2-structured/dedicated-community-leader.md)

   For more information, please compare the original file(en) with the translated file. You can view the differences on GitHub. The number of days since overdue updates is 6 days.

   # diff --git a/patterns/2-structured/dedicated-community-leader.md b/patterns/2-structured/dedicated-community-leader.md
   # index 91f3c3d..8f5235d 100644
   # --- a/patterns/2-structured/dedicated-community-leader.md
   # +++ b/patterns/2-structured/dedicated-community-leader.md
   @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ Having excellent and dedicated community leaders is a precondition for the succe
    ## Known Instances
    
    * _BIOS at Robert Bosch GmbH_. Note that InnerSource at Bosch was, for the majority, aimed at increasing innovation and to a large degree dealt with internal facing products. This pattern is currently not used at Bosch for lack of funding.
   +* _Airbus_. A data scientist wanted to improve the collaboration with peers in the group and found: i) many developers (beyond data science) wanted that too and were happy someone was taking care of the issue, and ii) support from line manager and middle management to eventually act as the _de facto_ community leader, on top of his regular line of duty.
    
    ## Alias
    

   Start as an Experiment (patterns/2-structured/start-as-experiment.md)

   For more information, please compare the original file(en) with the translated file. You can view the differences on GitHub. The number of days since overdue updates is 6 days.

   # diff --git a/patterns/2-structured/start-as-experiment.md b/patterns/2-structured/start-as-experiment.md
   # index 53326df..56e0c7d 100644
   # --- a/patterns/2-structured/start-as-experiment.md
   # +++ b/patterns/2-structured/start-as-experiment.md
   @@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ Finally, starting as an experiment makes it much easier to sidestep regulations
    ## Known Instances
    
    - Robert Bosch GmbH (globally distributed software development)
   +- Airbus: the data science community collaborated on shared Python libraries that eventually lead to a group-wide InnerSource scheme for any software.
    
    ## Status
    
3. spier commented on Dec 1, 2023

   

   spier

   on Dec 1, 2023

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   Ooops. The last comment is about translation issues between en and pt-br. So not sure why it was added to this issue.

   Likely a bug in .github/workflows/i18n-consistency-checker.yaml
   Maybe related other issues that we found, see #586
4. spier

   closed this as completedon Feb 27, 2024