Maybe let the user choose the level at the start?
I agree that new people could get confused, but being able to increase the
level could help spread the details. As in the incubator these details are what
usually result in -1 votes.
Chris
Am 25.01.18, 11:16 schrieb "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <st...@apache.org>:
Thanks for having a go, Justin! We need more ways to explain license and
distribution challenges.
I also got just 1 of 5, even on multiple tries on the same questions. Also
the fact that the correct answer(s) is not shown graphically is confusing.
i thinks such a quiz should not deliberately cover all the subtleties which
as we see here we are not in 100% agreement on; that just make people
conclude that "It's too complicated".
The quiz should rather cover the obvious bits so that this could be used by
newcomers to the Incubator, rather than try to catch out ASF members.
I would avoid tricky multiple choice, except in obvious multi-things like
"which licenses allowed" (which I thought was a good, more obvious
question).
Other kind of simpler questions could be:
Which of these need to include/show LICENCE and NOTICE files for an ASF
release?
Source code release on www.apache.org/dist
Binary release zip on www.apache.org/dist
Binary JARs in Maven Central
Windows installer at Launchpad.net
OSX disk image in Apple store
Source code release in Debian
Here all of the above is right answer. I left out "Source code repository
in git" because at least in Incubator we allow slight diversions here (and
also repos would include older commits possibly pre-ASF).
Which of the below should be included in NOTICE for contributions to Apache
Foo under Apache License 2.0?
1 Apache Software Foundation
2 Apache Foo
3 Apache Foo PMC members
4 Apache Foo Committers who contributed to release
5 Contributors who submitted patches to Apache Foo
6 NOTICE of Apache-licensed code that was included from outside ASF
Only 1,2,6 are correct.
Here I left out "Other Apache Projects which code was reused" and "Code
contributed in software grant" because those can be more complicated.
On 25 Jan 2018 8:02 am, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote:
> In general I think it's a great Idea.
> I would really like to bring this to my new Apache colleagues in the PLC4X
> project ... this way they could get up to speed with the formal stuff.
>
> But I think the tool does need a little optimization ;-)
>
> I think from 5 questions I got about 1 right ;-)
>
> But I guess it was mainly cause I interpreted the answers as if they are
> aggregated to form a correct answer.
> For example I interpreted the answers "3 +1 votes" and "more +1 than -1"
> as being ANDed to form the correct answer, but Justin told me "more +1
than
> -1" is correct as you could also have "3 +1 and 100000 -1 votes". This was
> not obvious to me and I think if the aggregation of all answers form the
> correct one, It would be more intuitive. I would really like a quiz like
> that that lists up different parts and all that are correct have to be
> clicked. It requires to know the same information, but doesn't make you
mad
> if you missed some little trick ;-)
>
> Chris
>
> Am 25.01.18, 08:55 schrieb "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com>:
>
> Hi,
>
> > I return to my point: "No" was the best answer (tho its qualifiers
> were
> > wrong), and the "Yes" was wrong for that question.
>
> Yes I agree No is the best answer (and is the correct answer is just
> about every single case) and Yes is wrong in that question. Is "Yes but
> only for some common build tools.” correct or not, currently I have it
down
> as correct, but if it’s not as your saying then the text (and title) at
> [1] I think would need to change. May be best to bring up on legal
discuss?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#build-tools
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>
>
