RE: [dsdp-pmc] Clarification: Please Vote on CQ 2761, CQ 2762 AND CQ 27

["Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi all,

 

I find it tiresome trying to get unanimous PMC approval on the per-CQ level.

 

If I'm not mistaken, the "PMC Approved" on CQs is not in order to assess

possibility of any IP problems -- it is merely to assess whether we actually

want some functionality on the project, or not. Primary reason for "not

wanting" some functionality is if we know of duplicate similar functionality

elsewhere.

 

That being said, my understanding is that the "PMC Approved" is on a

per-functionality granularity, and who approved the "JM Unit Library"

would implicitly also approve the "1.0 and 1.1" versions. Also note that

in case somebody finds an issue after the fact, it is still possible to

revoke things (it's long enough until something gets actually shipped,

and the IP Team does a good job too).

 

Other PMC's allow a single PMC member to approve CQ's on behalf of

the entire PMC. Trying to get unanimous consent slows things down

and is work for each of us. Do we all really want this?

 

+1 on CQ 2769 under the old policy,

 

and I request a change of policy to allow single PMC members approve

on behalf of the entire PMC, provided that they (a) seek assistance of

other PMC members if they are not technological lead in some area,

and (b) inform the PMC by E-Mail about their rationale of approving.

 

Cheers,

--

Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River

Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member

http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm

 

 

---

From: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christian Kurzke
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 8:59 PM
To: DSDP PMC list
Cc: Paula Gustavo-WGP010; Eric Hildum-XFQ473
Subject: [dsdp-pmc] Clarification: Please Vote on CQ 2761,CQ 2762 AND CQ 2769

There is some confusion around those CQ's,  the initial CQ 2761 was covering TWO Jar files, and the Legal team advised to create separate CQ's for each Jar file.
The new CQ 2769 is for the second library.


Please vote for the missing CQ's.

Here is a link to the IP-Zilla entries:


The code for the plugin itself is covered by CQ 2762         : https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2762

The supporting Library for CLDC 1.0 is covered by CQ 2761    : https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2761
The supporting Library for CLDC 1.1 is covered by CQ 2769    : https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2769


Overview of current votes:

PMC Member	CQ 2761 :    JM Unit CLDC 1.0 Library	CQ 2769 :    JM Unit CLDC 1.1 Library	CQ 2762 :  JmeUnit Plugin
Doug Gaff	+1		+1
Pawel Piech			+1
Shigeki Moride			+1
Christian Kurzke	+1		+1
Mark Rogalski
Martin Oberhuber	+1		+1
Eric Cloninger			+1
Dave Russo

Christian Kurzke wrote:

More Info:

We received a contribution to MTJ from Nokia via Bugzilla.
The contribution was created by Nokia, is submitted under the terms of the EPL.

This contribution provides a "JUnit" like feature for JavaME developers, using a Apache 2 licensed open source library.


The code for the plugin itself is covered by CQ 2762 : https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2762

The supporting Library is covered by CQ 2769    : https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2769

_______________________________________________
dsdp-pmc mailing list
dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-pmc