Six checks, every submission. Miss one and it comes back with notes; fix it and resubmit. Nothing here is a judgement call about whether your project is impressive these are the things that are either true or not. ## Replaces something proprietary It stands in for something people pay for, or something closed you'd rather have open. **Name it in your project description.** Hardware counts, as long as it's beneficial to a homelab or on-prem setup even indirectly. An antenna that pulls in public radio channels and streams them is a CloudFALL project, but a generic aliexpress antenna in a jellyfin lab is not. Hardware should come from you. ## Built new, during this round No resubmitting a project from another YSWS. A project you started earlier can inspire this one; it can't _be_ this one. ## Hours tracked Every hour in Hackatime/Lapse, linked to the project you submit. Untracked time can't be counted, and at most 30% of the work can be AI-assisted. ## Open source, permanently - Public GitHub repo. - A permissive licence, as a `LICENSE` file. - A README with images. - It stays up. Deleting the repo after review is not how this works. ## It runs A live link a reviewer can open and use. If it's self-hosted only, ship a repo and a Docker container so the reviewer can start it themselves. See [Package it so it runs](/cloudfall/packaging). ## It's your own work Not a tutorial followed step for step. Not somebody else's project with the colours changed. Using libraries, base images and other people's Compose files is normal engineering passing off someone else's project as yours is not. But something only you can build/only you want. ## If it comes back You'll get notes naming the specific check that failed. Fix that thing and resubmit; there's no penalty for a resubmission. If the notes don't make sense, ask in **#ysws-CloudFALL** reviewers are in there, and "I don't understand this note" is a completely reasonable message.