Docs: Create TUF docs analysis folder

analyses/0012-TUF/TUF-analysis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+---
+title: TUF Documentation Analysis
+tags: TUF
+created: 2024-06-17
+modified: YYYY-MM-DD
+author: Sandra Dindi (@Dindihub)
+---
+
+## Introduction
+
+This document analyzes the effectiveness and completeness of 
+[The Update Framework](https://theupdateframework.io) (TUF) open source software (OSS) project's documentation
+and website. It is funded by the CNCF Foundation as part of its overall effort
+to incubate, grow, and graduate open source cloud native software projects.
+
+According to CNCF best practices guidelines, effective documentation is a
+prerequisite for program graduation. The documentation analysis is the first
+step of a CNCF process aimed at assisting projects with their documentation
+efforts.
+
+### Purpose
+
+This document analyzes the current state of **The Update Framework (TUF)**
+documentation. It provides project leaders with an informed understanding
+of potential problems in current project documentation. A second [TUF-impementation.md](./TUF-implementation.md)
+document, , outlines an actionable plan for improvement. A third document, the 
+[TUF-issues.md](./TUF-issues.md) outlines issues to be added to the project documentation repository. These
+issues can be taken up by contributors to improve the documentation.
+
+This document:
+
+- Analyzes the current TUF technical documentation and website
+- Compares existing documentation against the CNCF’s standards
+- Recommends a program of key improvements with the largest return on investment
+
+### Scope of analysis
+
+The documentation includes the entire contents of the website,
+the technical documentation, and documentation for contributors and users on the TUF GitHub repository.
+
+The TUF website and documentation are written in Markdown and compiled using the Hugo static site generator and served on the Netlify platform. The site's code is stored on the TUF GitHub
+repo.
+
+#### In scope
+
+- Website: https://theupdateframework.io
+- Documentation: https://theupdateframework.io/content
+- Website configuration(Hugo): https://github.com/theupdateframework/theupdateframework.io
+
+
+#### Out of scope
+
+- The TUF community repository: https://github.com/theupdateframework/community
+- TUF specification repository: https://github.com/theupdateframework/specification
+- Python reference implementaion reposiroty: https://github.com/theupdateframework/python-tuf
+- TUF Augmentation proposals respsitory: https://github.com/theupdateframework/taps
+- TUF artwork repository: https://github.com/theupdateframework/artwork
+
+
+### How this document is organized
+
+This document is divided into three sections that represent three major areas of
+concern:
+
+- **Project documentation:** Analyzes documentation for users of the TUF project
+  software.
+- **Contributor documentation:** Analyzes documentation for existing and new contributors to TUF project.
+- **Website:** Analyzes the mechanics of publishing the documentation, including branding, website structure, and maintainability.
+
+Each section begins with summary ratings based on a rubric with appropriate
+[criteria] for the section, then proceeds to:
+
+- **Comments**: Observations about the existing documentation, with a focus on
+  how it does or does not help TUF project users achieve their goals.
+- **Recommendations**: Suggested changes that would improve the effectiveness of
+  the documentation.
+
+The accompanying [implementation](./TUF-implementation.md) document breaks the recommendations down into
+concrete actions that can be implemented by project contributors. Its focus is
+on drilling down to specific, achievable work that can be completed in
+constrained blocks of time. 
+
+Ultimately, the implementation items are decomposed
+into a series of [issues](./TUF-issues.md) that can be implemented by the project maintainers.
+
+### How to use this document
+
+Readers interested only in actionable improvements should skip this document and
+read the **[implementation](./TUF-implementation.md) plan** and **[issues](./TUF-issues.md) list**.
+
+Readers interested in the current state of the documentation and the reasoning
+behind the recommendations should read the section of this document pertaining
+to their area of concern:
+
+- [Project documentation]()
+- [Contributor documentation]()
+- [Website and documentation infrastructure]()
+
+
+#### Recommendations, requirements, and best practices
+
+This analysis measures documentation against CNCF project maturity standards,
+and suggests possible improvements. In most cases there is more than one way to
+do things. Few recommendations here are meant to be prescriptive. Rather, the
+recommended implementations represent the reviewers' experience with how to
+apply documentation best practices. In other words, borrowing terminology from
+the lexicon of [RFCs][rfc-spec], the changes described here should be understood
+as "recommended" or "should" at the strongest, and "optional" or "may" in many
+cases. Any "must" or "required" actions are clearly denoted as such, and pertain
+to legal requirements such as copyright and licensing issues.
+
+## Project documentation
+
+
+| Criteria                  | Rating (1-5) |
+| -------------------------- | -------------- |
+| Information architecture   | 3 |
+| New user content           | 1 |
+| Content maintainability    | 3 |
+| Content creation processes | 1 |
+| Inclusive language         | 3 |
+
+Scale:
+
+- 1 = (Is not present)
+- 3 = (Is present, but needs improvement)
+- 5 = (Is executed extremely well or no improvement required)
+
+### Comments
+The following sections contain brief assessments of each element of the Project
+Documentation rubric.
+
+#### Information architecture
+
+- There is an overview section explaining what TUF is and its use cases. The features, the metadata and roles are well explained with examples for each metadata.
+
+- No tutorials for specific feature implementation. But, there are videos explaining various use cases.
+