Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [orbit-dev] CQs, CQs and more CQs
Good question Christian. Personally I think we should strike while the metal is hot and update the IP logs as soon as you have new CQ numbers. There would then be a validation step where we would have to check that all CQs listed are indeed approved. But we would have to do something similar either way. Just one guy's opinion. 

Jeff

Christian Damus wrote:

Hi, Jeff,

Every time a reminder for the Ganymede deadline was sent out, I thought
"yeah, I don't have any CQs for new libraries" because these bundles have
been around since Europa.  Of course, Europa shipped without any Orbit CQs
for them  :-(

Currently, my IP log data references the CQs for the projects that
originally contributed these libraries before Orbit came on the scene.  I
thought I should wait to update the IP log files until after these new
piggy-backs are approved.  Can we use pending requests to demonstrate IP
cleanliness?

If that's not a problem, I shall update my IP logs forthwith.

Thanks,

Christian




Christian W. Damus
Component Lead, Eclipse OCL and EMF MQ/MT/VF
IBM Rational Sofware
Jeff McAffer <jeff@xxxxxxxxx> Sent by: To orbit-dev-bounces Orbit Developer discussion @eclipse.org <orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> cc 02/05/2008 06:34 Subject PM Re: [orbit-dev] CQs, CQs and more CQs Please respond to Orbit Developer discussion <orbit-dev@eclips e.org> 



Great.  Thanks Christian for the fast action!

I neglected to mention this in the previous message but given that the
Ganymede CQ deadline was a few days ago, we really ought to get the
required CQs in as soon as possible.  If we leave it too late then it
gets unreasonable to expect the IP team to handle so many late breaking
CQs.

BTW, were you able to update the IP log to capture the new CQs related
to these libs?

Jeff

Christian Damus wrote:

Hi, Jeff,

Thanks for the friendly kick in the pants.

The following three new CQs will together account for 18 more bundles:

Batik 1.6:
http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2070

LPG Java Runtime 1.0:
http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2071

LPG Java Runtime 1.1:
http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2072

Cheers,

Christian




Christian W. Damus
Component Lead, Eclipse OCL and EMF MQ/MT/VF
IBM Rational Sofware






             Jeff McAffer



             <jeff@xxxxxxxxx>



             Sent by:

To

             orbit-dev-bounces         orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx



             @eclipse.org

cc
Subject 
             02/05/2008 04:35          [orbit-dev] CQs, CQs and more CQs



             PM



             Please respond to



              Orbit Developer



                discussion



             <orbit-dev@eclips



                  e.org>





If you are responsible for a bundle in Orbit then this message concerns
you.  If you are not, you might want to read on anyway to get some more
IP insight ...

Fact:  Each project consuming a third-party library MUST enter a CQ for
that library for that project regardless of whether or not that library
is already in use approved for use in another project.

Fact: There are currently 31 FIXED (i.e., approved) CQs attributed to
the Orbit project



https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=tools&component=tools.orbit&long_desc_type=substring&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=RESOLVED&resolution=FIXED&emailassigned_to1=1&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailassigned_to2=1&emailreporter2=1&emailcc2=1&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse


Fact: We ship about 90 actual binary bundles out of Orbit (the rest are
the corresponding source)

Fact: Shipped - Approved should = 0

Fact: 90 - 31 != 0

So, what do we do.  In many cases the situation is simple, the bundles
in Orbit have CQs but the CQs are for some other project.  To fix that
situation we simply enter CQs for Orbit that "piggyback" off the
original CQ.  That will account for much of the difference.

The others likely are not in the IP log yet



http://download.eclipse.org/tools/orbit/downloads/drops/S20080203062035/iplog-S20080203062035.html


This requires the person responsible for the bundle in Orbit to enter a
CQ or find a corresponding CQ and piggyback off it.  In most cases I
expect there will already be a CQ to piggyback so it should be easy.

There will be a few left over that we'll have to deal with but lets see
how that looks once we have covered all the easy ones.

As a motivator we will have to remove from Orbit any bundles that do not
have IP log entries complete with CQs by M6 -1 (here I mean the Eclipse
project M6 (March 28). For those without a calendar, M6 -1 is EclipseCon
week so if you own a bundle and are going to EclipseCon, you'd best get
your bundles/CQs/IPlog entries in order before then.  Why delay?  Do it
now!

Questions and comments to this list please.
Jeff

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


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


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


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

Back to the top