10K Euros is too much budget for this vague request. What exactly is to be realized with the budget? Does the certification itself cost money or will the money be invested in improvements within the TYPO3 core?
I’m with Peter. Maybe we can submit a smaller budget as evaluation first in order to analyse what needs to be done? And the follow-up budget than can actually work on making the necessary changes.
Thanks for replies. Idea comes from us at CPS as a “last minute” idea, but without details. I am in conversation with RAL GmbH hopefully this week (or next), to provide more information and details. So, don’t have a concrete time/cost plan yet.
Lower budget to evaluate (if necessary after conversation with RAL), could be an idea.
If we cannot manage that in this budget cycle, with maybe use next one or find other ways, as the label could be another marketing boost and separating issue to other products for next tender in both, public and private market. TYPO3 would be the first CMS, is we can manage this certification process.
I just had a quick look through the guidelines (Basic Award Criteria) and of course I can see how such an official label with outside verification can be beneficial for marketing/sales, e.g. when a potential customer has to decide between similar software products from competing vendors/agencies.
I am not sure however, if this specific label can be applied to a server-based CMS like TYPO3. The current version of these guidelines is V3 from January 2020(!) and states the following:
“The focus will firstly be placed on one area of ICT: application software that is primarily run on desktop systems (see Scope). The aim is to expand the scope of the environmental label later on to other architectures, such as client server systems and mobile apps.”
4 years later however there does not seem to be a new version that includes these areas. The guidelines mention specific requirements within a contract with the vendor, reference systems on which the performance of the software would be measured (from 2015-2019) and also update requirements that likely interfere with the normal release schedule / the policy for breaking changes, e.g.:
“it must still be possible after an update to run the same standard usage scenario on the same reference system as used for the application and to run the software on the reference system that was valid five years before the application.”
Some of this likely also clashes with things like GDPR which require the use of “state of the art” software (Article 32 “Security of processing”).
Other criteria mentioned like modularity, proper documentation and continuous development would be much easier to fulfill.
So it would be interesting to find out directly from the company that runs this label how the V3 of their guidelines would adapt to these issues for a server-based software these days.
Right, thanks Robert. That’s one task we try to clarify with RAL GmbH.
Primary goal is for marketing/sales, second for quick improvements on a technical level, based on the test output.
Do you know if this certification is based on any widely accepted standard?
Background: I’m all for certifying TYPO3 (it is great for marketing). However, I think we should always make sure that the standard is internationally accepted or based on an internationally accepted standard. It doesn’t have to be globally accepted, but the broader geographical acceptance, the better.
Great input, I agree. Certificates for Green IT | BMZ Digital.Global lists more opportunities, to the label. We did not made a comparison between them and chosen Blauer Engel, as it was mentioned via Parliamentary questions.