From a036047605efd40c65d4a817e74e3daca7be6cf0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Mathias=20G=C3=B6bel?= <goebel@sub.uni-goettingen.de>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 14:09:04 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] extend reference
Co-authored-by: Ubbo Veentjer <veentjer@sub.uni-goettingend.de>
Co-authored-by: Markus Matoni <matoni@sub.uni-goettingen.de>
Co-authored-by: Stefan Funk <fugu@fugu.de>
---
rdd-technical-reference.md | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/rdd-technical-reference.md b/rdd-technical-reference.md
index 7598966..c10d5c5 100644
--- a/rdd-technical-reference.md
+++ b/rdd-technical-reference.md
@@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ The workflows we are using currently in Jenkins and Gitlab Runner are:
* Code analyzer (Sonar)
* Packaging (JAR, WAR, DEB, XAR)
* Distribution (Nexus, APTLY repo, eXist repo)
-* Release Management (@TODO: where to put this? gitflow?)
+* Release Management (via GitLab Environments and gitflow)
#### Sample configuration of the GitLab Runner
@@ -374,28 +374,44 @@ node {
## Deployment and maintenance
-- @TODO: Puppet
+### Puppet
-- @TODO: Monitoring (such as Icinga, Metrics)
+### Monitoring
+### Release Management
# Code quality level for RDD
- Evaluate Software maturity levels from CESSDA: @TODO @mw
-- @TODO: Code reviewing, evaluate quality level
+## Code review
+We want to ensure code review for all major commits, in gitflow for everything
+that is subject to be merged into `develop`.
-- @TODO: Wissenschaftliche Standards für wissenschaftliche Software?!
+Projects with more than one developer in the team, it is preferred to have code
+reviewer within the team, in other cases your friendly rdd developer team is
+on your side.
+### Proof of concept
+When preparing a proof of concept that is always labeled `poc`, a code review is
+not necessary.
-# Licencing
+
+# Licensing
- clarify software licence before programming
- add licence to code header
-- @TODO: depends on used software libraries, project and/or funder
+Best practice is to maintain a file listing all third-party packages that are
+part of the software. This list should hold the following metadata and SHOULD be
+prepared like the table below, always in alphanumeric order.
+
+| name | license | origin |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| foo | barware | github.com/foo/bar |
+May be the `license-maven` plugin will help you.
# Retirement of software
--
GitLab