[orbit-dev] RE: Bugfixing 3rd party code due to lack of a release?

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

Hi Janet,

thanks a lot for that quick response.

Just to clarify, can you comment on what
Adrian Cho wrote earlier today on the 
orbit-dev list:

As far as the license goes - what you're suggesting - getting the
contribution under the EPL actually makes it more problematic.  You
can't
take EPL code and dump it into the middle of an Apache licensed file.
That
doesn't make much sense.  In general even if there are cases where
licenses
are compatible, we usually maintain only one license per file otherwise
it
can get very unwieldy and confusing (e.g. lines 10 - 15 are XYZ license,
license 20 - 95 are ABC license, etc.).

My personal feeling is that the resulting 
code (original file + applied patch) would 
be APL, because (APL + (APL+EPL)) == APL,
but also having it as EPL give us a 
safety net. What do you think?

For the CQ, I wanted to file it but I'm blocked due to
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=203098
IPZilla Login Failure when trying to submit a CQ through the Portal

Thanks,
--
Martin Oberhuber
Wind River Systems, Inc.
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Janet Campbell [mailto:janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 6:22 PM
> To: 'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'; Oberhuber, Martin
> Cc: 'Orbit Developer discussion'
> Subject: RE: Bugfixing 3rd party code due to lack of a release?
> 
> Hi Martin,
> 
> Yes, please have the author attach the code to a bug with an 
> indication that
> they are submitting the contribution under the terms of the 
> EPL and enter an
> associated CQ for the requirement.   We'll expedite our review.
> 
> Thanks,
> Janet