[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Hi there,
just briefly:
I ve seen that there will be a release on the upcoming Wednesday. However,
due to Chris' last mail I'm not sure whether the new components are
included or not.
2694 jwt-we-view-uml - technology.jwt initial contribution Eclipse
Public License
2698 JWT Transformation Base Eclipse Public License
2699 JWT2XPDL transformation
2701 JWT to BPMN transformation
jwt-we-view-uml: this code has been completely written by myself with
support from Chris, so all by committers, should not be a problem so.
transformation base comes from Mickael and maybe other persons from OpenWide?
jwt2xpdl is OpenWide as well.
JWT to BPMN comes from Stephane.
So for the other three I can't answer for sure whether they
ve written it for theirselves, but I guess so. So all of these CQs might
be included in the upcoming release next Wednesday.
Thanks for clarifying this with Shannon, for the future this will make it
a lot easier.
Good luck with the release, I won't be available the next days again on
the internet, so I won't be able to support you here. Thanks for all the
work done!!
Best regards and greetings from my holiday in Sydney,
Florian
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> concerning the CQ issue, I've talked Sharon Corbett of the Eclipse IP team
> who has been really supportive.
>
>
>
> She said that, as Mickael already suspected, CQs only have to be created
> if:
>
>
>
> - there is third party code or cryptography involved
>
> - some of the code has been written by non-committers
> (contributors)
>
> - some of the code has been written outside/before the JWT
> project
>
>
>
> If this is not the case, these important points remain:
>
>
>
> - The submission should be under the supervision of the PMC.
> Sharon
> talked to Wayne who said that it is not necessary to post on the PMC
> mailing
> list if the PMC is informed about the ongoing development in the project,
> however it should be posted on the dev mailing list and a bugzilla entry
> with attached code should be created.
>
> - The submitted files must have all necessary copyright
> information
> like correct headers and be published under the EPL.
>
>
>
> Effectively, for us this means:
>
>
>
> - We can submit code that conforms(!) to the aforementioned
> requirements at any time and we do NOT need to write CQs for these
> components
>
> - The IP team was under the impression that the currently pending
> CQs were entered because the code came from outside JWT. I'm not quite
> sure
> if this is the case or not since Florian submitted most of them. If this
> is
> actually not true, then the CQs can be discarded and we can include these
> components in JWT 0.5.0. However, we have to wait until Florian comes back
> since he has to confirm himself that the code complies to the
> requirements.
>
> - All in all this means that we can probably release the
> transformation components as part of 0.5.0 a few days after the workflow
> editor (when Florian comes back) and we do not have to write CQs for new
> components like examples for extension points.
>
>
>
> Nevertheless, Sharon encouraged us not to hesitate to contact the Eclipse
> team if something IP releated seems not quite clear and also suggested to
> take a look at the visualized eclipse legal process:
>
> http://www.eclipse.org/legal/EclipseLegalProcessPoster.pdf
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Christian
>
> _______________________________________________
> jwt-dev mailing list
> jwt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jwt-dev
>
