Update meta.yaml

[Whiteends]

Updated meta.yaml to reflect the organisation's DevSecOps teams

[wurstbrot]

Thank you for the PR.

@vbakke does this match your team enhancements?

[vbakke]

Thank you @Whiteends to take your time to suggest improvements to DSOMM.

I might not agree with all your suggestions, but feel free to share your thoughts why you suggested this. I might be missing the background.

[vbakke]

I agree that ToDo tasks could have a 'Critical' label. But these labels are displayed for 'Time', 'Resources' and 'Usefullness'.

I don't think it makes sense to have 'Critical time' as a label for something that takes a long time. Same for 'Critical resouces'. As for 'Critical usfullness', it makes more sense. But then again, 'Very high usefullness' is also fine, and does not require us to split the lables into several arrays.

[vbakke]

This is interesting. I was on a very different planet. This changeis suggesting the each team is different type of team. That can definitely also be the case.

In my head, all teams were development teams. (Or different applications in an organisation.) And I just named them Team A, Team B, Team C and Team D.

Then I was splitting these into the groups:

• Customer related
• Internal focus
• Cloud
• On-premise

Just to illustrate situations where a team/application naturally may have more than one parent.

The teams in the default meta.yaml will only be an initial suggestion, that users can change.
(And @Whiteends, some time this year, we might publish an update where users can manually change the team names in the browser. Feel free to comment and have a sneak peak at https://dsomm.pages.dev/teams)

I have no strong feelings about what specific names we choose to be the inital default values. But I think it should be an example than makes sense for most people in many situations, and that is easy to understand.

So please share your thoughts @Whiteends. There are no rights or wrongs here, just shades of grey 😊

[Whiteends]

Hi Timo, Thank you, i agree with your response on the "rating". That makes lot of sense, but the team should be tailored a bit more to the technical stakeholders; DevOps, Developers, Security, etc since most of the stakeholders responsible for providing responses are technical stakeholders. My only question is if we can get a report (maybe in PDF or CSV?) based on the supplied information. If we can get a report that will contain responses to each process, gap analysis and recommendations based on the supplied responses? I understand we currently get that with the "downloadable YAML file" but you'll understand how limiting this can be, i am rady to provide support for this integration, thank you!

…

On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 7:33 PM vbakke ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. Thank you @Whiteends <https://github.com/Whiteends> to take your time to suggest improvements to DSOMM. I might not agree with all your suggestions, but feel free to share your thoughts why you suggested this. I might be missing the background. ------------------------------ In src/assets/YAML/meta.yaml <#391 (comment)> : > @@ -21,16 +21,16 @@ strings: label: ISO 27001:2022 description: |- ISO 27001:2022 - labels: ['Very Low', 'Low', 'Medium', 'High', 'Very High'] + labels: ['Very Low', 'Low', 'Medium', 'High', 'Critical'] I agree that ToDo tasks could have a 'Critical' label. But these labels are displayed for *'Time'*, *'Resources'* and *'Usefullness'*. I don't think it makes sense to have *'Critical time'* as a label for something that takes a long time. Same for *'Critical resouces'*. As for *'Critical usfullness'*, it makes more sense. But then again, *'Very high usefullness'* is also fine, and does not require us to split the lables into several arrays. ------------------------------ In src/assets/YAML/meta.yaml <#391 (comment)> : > @@ -40,8 +40,8 @@ strings: 'Level 5: Advanced deployment of security practices at scale', ] # Default team -teams: ['Default', 'B', 'C'] +teams: ['DevOps', 'Security', 'Applications'] This is interesting. I was on a very different planet. This changeis suggesting the each team is different *type* of team. That can definitely also be the case. In my head, all teams were development teams. (Or different applications in an organisation.) And I just named them *Team A, Team B, Team C* and *Team D*. Then I was splitting these into the groups: - Customer related - Internal focus - Cloud - On-premise Just to illustrate situations where a team/application naturally may have more than one parent. The teams in the default meta.yaml will only be an initial suggestion, that users can change. (And @Whiteends <https://github.com/Whiteends>, some time this year, we might publish an update where users can manually change the team names in the browser. Feel free to comment and have a sneak peak at https://dsomm.pages.dev/teams) I have no strong feelings about what specific names we choose to be the inital default values. But I think it should be an example than makes sense for most people in many situations, and that is easy to understand. So please share your thoughts @Whiteends <https://github.com/Whiteends>. There are no rights or wrongs here, just shades of grey 😊 — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#391 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AV2OLD6TVEX3YCILZUKFVKT3NIXN7AVCNFSM6AAAAACDVYTN6SVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZTCMJSGEZTOMBUGI> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: <devsecopsmaturitymodel/DevSecOps-MaturityModel/pull/391/review/3112137042 @github.com>

[wurstbrot]

@Whiteends @vbakke has the name "Vegard".

You are able to download an excel sheet at "mapping" with the green button.

[Whiteends]

Thank you Timo, What I actually meant by “downloading the matrix” is if we can get a report AFTER supplying responses in the “overview” section. Thank you!

…

On Wed, 13 Aug 2025 at 5:50 PM, Timo Pagel ***@***.***> wrote: *wurstbrot* left a comment (devsecopsmaturitymodel/DevSecOps-MaturityModel#391) <#391 (comment)> @Whiteends <https://github.com/Whiteends> @vbakke <https://github.com/vbakke> has the name "Vegard". You are able to download an excel sheet at "mapping" with the green button. image.png (view on web) <https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b4edc201-a8a9-4301-9af6-43622da83970> — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#391 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AV2OLDZFZIIAHVM7GNOVYTT3NNUDTAVCNFSM6AAAAACDVYTN6SVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTCOBUGY4DIMJWGY> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: <devsecopsmaturitymodel/DevSecOps-MaturityModel/pull/391/c3184684166@ github.com>

[wurstbrot]

ah ok. It is a bug that it is currently not implemented showing "false" for all teams.

I think we should wait for @vbakke enhamcenent with the different status to implement it

[vbakke]

My previous job position was a BI consultant (business intelligence, mainly QlikView, Qlik Sense, but also PowerBI). And frankly, DSOMM will never be able to cover all analytical need out there. What we can provide is data that you can be fed into ones own tools for more analytics.

Having said that, I'm working on a new release which in improving the internal data model, thus making it easier to provide some basic KPIs within DSOMM. Feel free to check out the experimental version on https://dsomm.pages.dev/ and leave comments on #380.

There you see that the end user can freely change the team names and groups for their own liking.

As for the Excel export, I don't recal the exact status in the experimental version. But each team-activity compnation will get more than just a boolean to indicate status. It will be a configurable set of stages, and each stage is given the date it was registered. Meaning it possible to later provide historical reviews, draw gannt diagrams etc.