Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [orbit-dev] Addind/Updating Libaries in Orbit

I can't check now but believe that the Orbit proposal (defacto charter) said that Orbit would only hold libs that were requested by other Eclipse project.

Having said that, here should be no limit on starting the process at Orbit and then piggybacking other projects.  I like the point you make wrt starting in the non-Orbit project.  As you say, that ensures that the lib is actually needed.  With the volume of libs coming in through incubators etc we need to be concious of the load being put on the IP team. 

I suggest that we make this best practice.

Jeff

David M Williams wrote:
I vaguely remember discussing it before too and while I won't recall the 
outcome, but I do recall at the time being surprised that I could not find 
anything in our Orbit charter that explicitly prohibited an "orbit only" 
CQ
http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/orbit/

but is certainly implied on our Orbit home page
http://www.eclipse.org/orbit/

So even if technically possible under rules of our charter, to me it still 
makes more sense business-wise, since otherwise, the Tools PMC would 
basically be approving the third party content be reviewed by Eclipse 
Foundation staff, etc., even though no Eclipse Project was known to need 
it or have approved it. There might be some such cases, but I think they'd 
be pretty rare and require some "extra" justification. 

In fact, I recall arguing we didn't need the Orbit CQ at all, if approved 
elsewhere ... but, I well recall the outcome of that discussion! [i.e. we 
do] :) 







From:
"Christian W. Damus" <cdamus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
Orbit Developer discussion <orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
11/10/2008 01:10 PM
Subject:
Re: [orbit-dev] Addind/Updating Libaries in Orbit



Hi, David,

Sorry to have given out bad advice.  I had thought that we started out 
with this process, and that following discussions with the 
Foundation's legal team, it was decided to take the other tack.  I 
agree that it seems desirable to track the origin of Eclipse's initial 
requirement for 3rd-party libs this way, and searching through the 
mail archive, I don't find anything that supports my wonky memory.

Perhaps we should add a step 0 to the "Adding Bundles to Orbit" page 
in the Wiki, and a note about this in the FAQ?  If we're all agreed, I 
can draft something.

Thanks,

Christian

On 10-Nov-08, at 12:49 PM, David M Williams wrote:

  
You should submit first the CQs for contribution to Orbit, then 
(once
those are approved) the piggy-back (PB) CQs for re-use of these
bundles in your project.
        
Turns our that I can't submit Orbit CQs. Thus, I started submitting 
CQs
for my project first.
      
Don't mean to start a controversy, but actually, I believe that's the
better procedure anyway. I'm not sure anyone polices it, so the other
approach might have worked, but we are supposed to only put things in
Orbit that are used by other Eclipse Projects ... hence, its better 
that
the original requesting Project gets the original CQ approved first, 
then
all others (including Orbit) can piggy back off that one. This way,
there's at least one PMC somewhere that reviews it and with their
approval state "... yes, this is worth expending resource and money on
for our project ...".


_______________________________________________
orbit-dev mailing list
orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/orbit-dev
    
--
Christian W. Damus
Senior Software Developer, Zeligsoft Inc.
Component Lead, Eclipse MDT OCL and EMF-QTV
E-mail: cdamus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx



_______________________________________________
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