DPG Contribution Readiness Framework

DPG Contribution Readiness Framework v1.0

Objective
1	For DPG Builders & Adopters - Evaluate the readiness of their products to receive high-quality open-source contribution - Identify best practices that can be incorporated to improve their Contribution Readiness Level.
2	For Open Source Contributors - Gauge the readiness level of different DPG products to receive quality contribution.

Guidelines for understanding the Framework
1	The framework comprises 3 independent categories- (1) Documentation & Code (2) Community Engagement and (3) project management
2	Within each category, the product could be at beginner, intermediate or advanced level. Each sub-point defined for a given level needs to be complied with for the DPG to be considered on that level
3	Implementing more sub-points within each category will help the product mature on the same & get a quality contribution. A higher level across the three categories will help make the product more likely to receive high quality, high volume and sustained open-source contributions.
4	The information listed in brackets under each sup-point is prescriptive and not mandatory. These details should be added depending on their relevance to the DPG.

	DPG Contribution Readiness Framework
#	Category / Levels	Beginner	Intermediate	Advance	Benchmark Examples
1	Documentation & Code	Level 1	Level 2	Level 3
1.1	Product ReadMe documentation available with basic details (Product description and vision)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Link
1.2	Product set-up documentation is available with the following details (Hardware, software, libraries, tools, API references, tech skills and product installation steps)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Link
1.3	The detailed functional and technical architecture of the DPG is available (Functional - use-case PRDs, impact envisioned | Technical - diagrams, technical specifications, APIs, algorithms, frameworks)		Yes	Yes	Link
1.4	Ensuring code quality via CI/CD and proper comments within the code		Yes	Yes	Link
1.5	Code Documentation with code coverage present (Test cases exist & run effectively via circle CI/GitHub actions etc)			Yes	Link
#	Category / Levels	Beginner	Intermediate	Advance	Benchmark Examples
2	Community Engagement	Level 1	Level 2	Level 3
2.1	Good First Issues listed, updated & reviewed periodically (GFI pull requests should be reviewed & closed within 1-2 weeks)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Link
2.2	A channel/forum for active communication with contributors should exist (eg: Discord, GitHub, Slack etc )	Yes	Yes	Yes	Link
2.3	Detailed community engagement guidelines & code of conduct for contributors available publically (process to contribute, preferred workflow, coding conventions, testing procedures, submitting a PR etc)		Yes	Yes	Link
2.4	Active issue management with timely response and closure to enable contributors (Timely feedback, guidance, query responses & closure)		Yes	Yes	Link
2.5	Working Group Meetings/Events with the community with MOM for public access (scrum calls, roadmap & feature discussions etc)			Yes	Link
#	Category / Levels	Beginner	Intermediate	Advance	Benchmark Examples
3	Project Management	Level 1	Level 2	Level 3
3.1	Public project management boards (Eg: JIRA, GitHub) & public assigning of tickets (for internal & external team members)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Link
3.2	Use open licenses to enable contributors to use the relevant libraries/software & allow for code re-use by adopters	Yes	Yes	Yes	Link
3.3	Issue tickets are being created as per a defined ticket taxonomy (proper labels, tags & headers to exists | C4GT issue ticket taxonomy can be referred)		Yes	Yes	Link
3.4	Public product roadmaps at a defined interval made available (Product goals,milestones, planned features etc)			Yes	Link
3.5	Public release management to ensure a smooth transition between versions (sharing versioning, release plans, changelogs, upgrade instructions etc)			Yes	Link