Create the Beman Library Maturity Model

[neatudarius]

Update Beman Standard: add README.LIBRARY_STATUS - #77

As discussed in multiple syncs , we need to introduce a new document. The current proposal is to add BEMAN_PROCESS.md and link it with the BEMAN_STANDARD.md.

Updates:

• Create BEMAN_LIBRAY_MATURITY_MODEL.md. Applied suggestions for 5 status values and their description from our last sync.
• Add README.LIBRARY_STATUS into the Beman Standard.
• Create images/ where to store all images. e.g. images/logos and others.

[RaduNichita]

I did a first pass on the documents, looks good

[RaduNichita]

Looks better, left a few more comments. Thanks @neatudarius

[neatudarius]

@RaduNichita , please take another look.

[RaduNichita]

All good 👍

[camio]

I added several comments to this PR. The most important is on the phase names. I think using descriptive names instead of introducing special parlance (like BEMAN DEVELOPMENT) will make it easier for readers to understand the status.

Here is what I suggested:

Before	After
BEMAN DEVELOPMENT	Under development and not yet ready for production use.
BEMAN UNSTABLE	Production ready. API may undergo changes.
BEMAN STABLE	Production ready. Stable API.

It also solves the problem that "unstable" has a negative connotation without additional context.

[bretbrownjr]

I'm in support of the work Darius is doing here.

I would mark this "Approved", but a bunch of us Beman contributors discussed this PR just now in the weekly meeting. The feeling in the room was that breaking the document up into separate parts would be great. In particular:

• Conceptual docs about the Beman maturity model that are intended for users of Beman libraries
• One or more how-to guides intended for Beman contributors

[neatudarius]

@bemanproject/leads @camio @inbal2l @RaduNichita , pushed a completely new version of this PR.
Please redo the review, I tried to incorporate all comments.

For the new file, please use the View file button if images are not displayed in diff preview mode (only full view mode works for me!)

Expected visual effect:

Example of expected usage in other repos: bemanproject/dump#6

[RaduNichita]

Could we generate logos as svg files?

[neatudarius]

I think we have enough information and replies (#72 (comment) and #72 (comment)) to conclude that at least the topic of adding an extra state for Beman libraries is controversial.

• @inbal2l has valid concerns about some usecases which may be clarified.
• @camio also has valid concerns about other usecases that are not included by adding a new state.
  Probably, on a long-term approach we need to rediscuss this topic in a sync. I know we briefly discussed 2 weeks ago, but it seems to not be enough.

===============================================

My personal conclusion is that right now there is NO benefit from adding a new state. There is no obvious perfect solution, so just using Retired is good enough. I think we had enough discussions about details on this PR and we don't have a concrete progress related to actually put "labels" on our libraries (and the website).

===============================================

I would strongly suggest to move forward with an initial version as we don't actually have a need right now to possible distinguish between these cases. My proposal is to split this machinery into versions:

• v1: Basic machinery about transition with current still usable libraries. Current status of this PR - check https://github.com/bemanproject/beman/blob/b3655c439ab329ec312b0d47a357395e6ca95dc6/docs/BEMAN_LIBRARY_MATURITY_MODEL.md.
  

• v2: If v1 needs to be expended, we can do that later. Adding such new status and associated transitions would NOT BREAK existing pipeline. It's just an extension.

Anybody can try to propose an extension later. I would really want to be able to use this framework EOY, please!

CC: @bemanproject/leads @inbal2l @camio @RaduNichita

[RaduNichita]

LGTM, thanks Darius!

[JeffGarland]

I'm coming in late here, but wow this looks really great to me -- especially using the logos!

I didn't read the whole history, but one thing I'll just mention that we might want to express somewhere is that retired really means it's been removed from the main distribution. The author might actually still be supporting -- and as we've discussed before some people might want to pull the library independently of Beman. I do not want to hold the PR for this comment -- but just something to think about.

[neatudarius]

I'm coming in late here, but wow this looks really great to me -- especially using the logos!

Thanks! I will merge it and do follow-up PRs.

I didn't read the whole history, but one thing I'll just mention that we might want to express somewhere is that retired really means it's been removed from the main distribution. The author might actually still be supporting -- and as we've discussed before some people might want to pull the library independently of Beman. I do not want to hold the PR for this comment -- but just something to think about.

I actually tried to apply your exact suggestion in my last commit. Please check. I can tweak it (here or in a new PR).

[steve-downey]

Trying to capture every nuance in a single label is probably impossible. This looks to me like it conveys the couple of highest order bits to let people know whether to continue investigating or not.

👍

[inbal2l]

LGTM