Introducing Pattern associated with InnerSource project fitness

[tapjdey]

This pattern should help with finding the appropriate pilot projects and assessing the suitability of candidate InnerSource projects based on the "InnerSource project Fitness" tool. As requested by @spier

[tapjdey]

Not sure what the link checker is complaining about, all links seem to work.

[spier]

Thanks for pitching this pattern @tapjdey.

Could you please rename the file to good-first-project.md? Some of the tools we use related to the patterns maybe have issues with spaces in the filenames.

If you do this in the commandline it would be something like
git mv Good\ First\ Project.md good-first-project.md

As for the Link Checker, don't worry about it, we can figure that out later.
The error message is:

https://ulir.ul.ie/bitstream/handle/10344/4443/Stol_2014_inner.pdf?sequence=2
		X509: certificate signed by unknown authority

[spier]

I will wait with more detailed feedback on the content until after you have renamed the file. Otherwise I am afraid that my inline comments might not get displayed correctly. :)

One high level thought already:

I believe we could make the pattern more generally applicable, if we manage to untie it a bit more from the specific implementation of the fitness score. e.g. if we could explain what makes for a good assessment of "InnerSource-readiness" of a single project, and then explain the different examples side by side. Something like:

a) Stol and Fitzgerald presented a set of nine key factors ...
b) Silona Bonewald's checklist ...
c) Criteria listed in Start as Experiment ...

And then finally we would of course list how your fitness score is synthesising (a)+(b) into a single solution (if I understand it correctly).

Not sure if explained that approach well?
I can try to draft it in a bit more detail if that helps.

[tapjdey]

@spier I have changed the file name as you requested. I have also added more content. It might be a bit too long and needs trimming, but let me know what you think.

[spier]

Hi @tapjdey. Fantastic first version already.

I made some non-controversial formatting changes myself.

Left other comments for you to review.

[spier]

@tapjdey I left some more suggestions. Most of them trying to make the text a bit simpler. Take a look :)

After your review, I think we should not word-smith this much further. For an initial pattern this is already great. So let's get this out into the world, so that we can get more feedback from others.

Could you please also add a link to this pattern in the README in this group, so that readers of our repo can find the pattern more easily?

I can come back to this tomorrow and help to get this over the finish line.

[tapjdey]

@spier Thank you for your help with this! I have reviewed all the suggestions.