en 1.7 Online survey tool survey-tool 1.0

Generic criteria from QSOS version 1.6 Intrinsic durability Maturity less than 3 months if between 3 months and 3 years after 3 years Unstable software with numerous releases or patches generating side effects Stabilized production release existing but old. Difficulties to stabilize development releases Stabilized software. Releases provide bug fixes corrections but mainly new functionalities Software knows several problems which can be prohibitive No know major problem or crisis History of good management of crisis situations Software is very likely to be forked in the future Software comes from a fork but has very few chances of being forked in the future Software has very little chance of being forked. It does not come from a fork either Adoption by community and industry Very few users identified Detectable use on Internet Numerous users, numerous references None Few refences, non critical usages Often implemented for critical applications No community or without real activity (forum, mailing list, ...) Existing community with a notable activity Strong community: big activity on forums, numerous contributors and advocates No book about the software Less than 5 books about the software are available More than 5 books about software are available, in several languages Organisation and leadership of developments 1 to 2 individuals involved, not clearly identified Between 2 and 5 independent people More than 5 people Complete dictatorship Enlightened despotism Council of architects with identified leader (e.g: KDE) Activity of the project and around the software Less than 3 developers, not clearly identified Between 4 and 7 developers, or more unidentified developers with important turnover More than 7 developers, very stable team Slow reactivity in forum or on mailing list, or nothing regarding bug fixes in releases note Detectable activity but without process clearly exposed, long reaction/resolution time Strong reactivity based on roles and tasks assignment No or few new functionalities Evolution of the product driven by the core team or by user's request without any clearly explained process Tool(s) to manage feature requests, strong interaction with roadmap Very weak activity on both production and development releases Activity on production and development releases. Frequent minor releases (bug fixes) Important activity with frequent minor releases (bugs fixes) and planned major releases relating to the roadmap forcast Industrialization level of the project Developments realized at 100% by employees of a single company 60% maximum 20% maximum Services offering No offer of training identified Offer exists but is restricted geographically and to one language or is provided by a single contractor Rich offers provided by several contractors, in several languages and split into modules of gradual levels No offer of support except via public forums and mailing lists Offer exists but is provided by a single contractor without strong commitment quality of services Multiple service providers with strong commitment (e.g: guaranteed resolution time) No offer of consulting service Offer exists but is restricted geographically and to one language or is provided by a single contractor Consulting services provided by different contractors in several languages No user documentation Documentation exists but shifted in time, is restricted to one language or is poorly detailed Documentation always up to date, translated and possibly adapted to different target readers (end user, sysadmin, manager, ...) Quality assurance process No QA process Identifies QA process but not much formalized and with no tool Automatic testing process included in code's life-cycle with publication of results No bug or feature request management tool Standard tools provided (for instance by a hosting forge) but poorly used Very active use of tools for roles/tasks allocation and progress monitoring Packaging for various operating systems Software can't be installed from source without lot of work Installation from source is limited and depends on very strict conditions (OS, arch, lib, ...) Installation from source is easy The software is not packaged for Debian A Debian package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support The software is packaged in the distribution The software is not packaged for FreeBSD A port exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support A official port exists in FreeBSD The software is not packaged for HP-UX A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support A stable package is provided for HP-UX The software is not packaged for MacOSX A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support The software is packaged in the distribution The software is not packaged for Mandriva A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support The software is packaged in the distribution The software is not packaged for NetBSD A port exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support A official port exists in NetBSD The software is not packaged for OpenBSD A port exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support A official port exists in OpenBSD The software is not packaged for RedHat/Fedora A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support The software is packaged in the distribution The software is not packaged for Solaris A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support (e.g: SunFreeware.com ) The software is supported by Sun for Solaris The software is not packaged for SuSE A package exists but it has important issues or it doesn't have official support The software is packaged in the distribution The project can't be installed on Windows A package exists but it is limited or has important issues or just cover some specific Windows release (e.g: Windows2000 and WindowsXP) Windows is full supported and a package is provided Exploitability level Difficult to use, requires an in depth knowledge of the software functionality Austere and very technical ergonomics GUI including help functions and elaborated ergonomics No administrative or monitoring functionalities Existing, functionalities but incomplete and or need improvement Complete and easy-to-use administration and monitoring functionalities. Possible integration with external tools (e.g: SNMP, syslog, ...) Technical adaptability Monolithic software Presence of hight level modules allowing a first level of software adaptation Modular conception, allowing easy adaptation of the software by selecting or creating modules Everything by hand Recompilation possible but complex without any tools or documentation Recompilation with tools (e.g: make, ANT, ...) and documentation provided Any modification requires code recompilation Architecture designed for static extension but requires recompilation Principle of plugin, architecture designed for dynamic extension without recompilation Project's strategy License Very strict license, like GPL Moderate permissive license located between both extremes (GPL and BSD) dual-licensing depending on the type of user (person, company, ...) or their activities Very permissive like BSD or Apache licenses Very permissive like BSD or Apache licenses Moderate permissive license located between both extremes (GPL and BSD), dual-licensing depending on the type of user (person, company, ...) or their activies Very strict license, like GPL Rights held by a few individuals or entities, making it easier to change the license Rights held by numerous individuals owning the code in a homogeneous way, making relicense very difficult Rights held by a legal entity in whom the community trusts (e.g: FSF or ASF) No practical way to propose code modification Tools provided to access and modify code (like CVS or SVN) but not really used to develop the software The code modification process is well defined, exposed and respected, based on roles assignment No published roadmap Existing roadmap without planning Versionned roadmap, with planning and measure of delays Software has no sponsor, the core team is not paid Software has an unique sponsor who might determine its strategy Software is sponsored by industry No detectable strategy or strong dependency on one unique actor(person, company,sponsor) Strategic vision shared with several other free and open source projects but without strong commitment from copyrights owners Strong independence of the code team, legal entity holding rights, strong involvement in the standardization process

Survey Management Online survey tool basic features Number of simultaneaous surveys Supports only one survey at a time Supports a limited number of simultaneous surveys Supports an unlimited number of simultaneous surveys Display modes: one page per question, per group, or per survey Only one question is displayed per page Questions can be displayed by group Possibility to display one question per page, one group per page, or all questions on the same page Surveys life cycle management Surveys have no publishing date Surveys have a publishing but this feature is limited or not usable The publishing date feature is fully supported Surveys have no expiration date Surveys have an expiration date but this feature is limited The expiration date feature is fully supported No status management, statically managed, extensible The tool doesn't manage survey states The tool supports survey states but they are statically defined and this is not extensible The tool supports survey states and is able to add new states and transitions Not supported, supported in a limited number, unlimited number Ability to sort questions Once defined, questions can't be sorted Once defined, questions can be sorted but this is limited or difficult to achieve Question sorting is fully supported Ability to manage group of questions as survey objects Questions can't be grouped Groups of questions are supported but are difficult to defined or to modify Groups of questions are fully supported, easy to define and modify Ability to sort group of questions Once defined, groups can't be sorted Once defined, groups can be sorted but this is limited or difficult to achieve Group sorting is fully supported Answer unicity mechanisms No mechanism is available to ensure answers unicity Some answers unicity mechanisms are implemented but they are limited or difficult to setup This feature is fully implemented Does the solution implements several types of questions (dropdown lists, checkboxes, multiple selections, etc...) A single type of questions is supported A small set of question types is implemented Usual question types are implemented (dropdown lists, checkboxes, multiple selections, etc...) Ability to define conditions depending on previous answers Conditional branching of questions is not supported Conditional branching of questions is implemented but is limited or difficult to setup Conditional branching of questions is fully implemented Answer validation feature to check participant's inputs No answer validation is performed on participant's inputs Answer types can be defined (number, dates, ...) Input validation can be done on predefined answer types (number, dates) and can be extended (sor instance with regular expressions) Ability to define question types and to reuse them in other surveys New question types can't be defined Question types are statically defined with no customisation parameters Predefined question types are customisable and extensible Can a participant reload a partially his answered survey No such feature is implemented Simple answer persistance (client side or token based) Simple answer persistance (server side, authenticated) Survey display customization Only one style is applied to all surveys Predefined templates can be applied on a per survey basis Per survey customisable templates (HTML, CSS, ...) can be defined Ability to import a question, a group with his questions, or the whole survey No import/export feature is implemented An Import/export feature is implemented for the whole survey (and associated objects) An Import/export feature is implemented at the survey, group, question, and other objects level) Supported Import/Exports formats No import/export feature implemented Import/Export uses a proprietary format Import/Export uses an extensible format

Survey invitations management Invitation publishing channel Via email only Multiple channels (IM, RSS, SMS, ...) but not extensible Multiple channels (IM, RSS, SMS, ...) and extensible No invitation message templating Invitation messages use predefined templates Invitation messages use customisable templates all invitations at once, one invitation at time, or customisable sets of invitations All the defined invitations are sent at the same time Each invitation can be sent independently The survey administrator can define sets of invitation to send in a batch Invitation status follow up No invitations follow up feature is implemented Invitations status tracking is available but is limited or difficult to use Invitations follow up is fully implemented and convenient to use Implemented feature to manage invitations reminders No invitation reminder feature implemented Manual or automatic reminders are implemented but they can't be customized Manual and automatic reminders given customisable conditions are implemented

Each answer can be displayed individually Individual answer display and table-formatted multiple answers display are implemented Individual answer display, table-formatted multiple answers display, and cross tabulation display No graphical output is implemented Graphical display of data is implemented but is not customizable Graphical display of data is implemented and is customizable Answers can be exported as a CSV file Answers can be exported to several standard file formats Answers can be exported to several standard file formats, and new file format are easy to define Answers can be imported from CSV files only Answers can be imported to several standard file formats Answers can be imported to several standard file formats, and new file format are easy to define

Deployment features Customization features Template management features: rename, add new, delete Survey templates can't be customized Survey templates can be renamed but not added or deleted Survey templates can be renamed, added and deleted Question type management features: modify, add, delete Question types can't be modified Question types can be modified but not added nor deleted Question types can be modified,added and deleted GUI customization features The GUI can't be customized Customizing the GUI is difficult The GUI is easily customized through the use of themes and CSS Integration of the tool in an existing Information System Authentication systems supported Only the integrated authentication method is supported Authentication can be done against some DMBS or flat files Authentication can be based on most DBMS, LDAP or flat files Supported backend storage Only the native backed storage of the solution is supported Data storage can use external DMBS or flat files Data storage can use most DBMS, LDAP or flat files Possible architectures Supported load balancing mechanisms No load balancing system is supported Load balancing is supported but with external products or without session sticking A sticky session load balancing mechanism iis implemented Supported high availability mechanisms No high availability mechanism is implemented High availability is supported through the use of a load balancing system High availability is supported in a cluster architecture with business continuity Ability to merge answers from sevral local servers The solution can't be splitted accross several servers Service distribution accross several servers is available but limited Full distribution of the solution accross local servers with answers database merging is implemented

Management features Available management tools Setup is done by editting files (no GUI nor CLI) A management interface is implemented but doesn't cover all the settable parameters A full management GUI is available No user rights management is implemented Simple rights management is implemented but it doesn't support iroles or groups An advanced user rights management with roles and groups is implemented Platform activity analysis Statistics on all surveys No platform-wide statistics available Some statistics are available, but it is difficult to modify them or add new ones An extensible platform-statistics module is implemented No platform activity reporting is implemented Some reports are implemented , but it is difficult to modify them or add new ones An extensible platform-statistics module is implemented Is an SQL query tool implemented ? No SQL query tool is implemented An SQL query tool is implemented, but queries can't be saved An SQL query tool is implemented and queries can be saved