| Re: [orbit-dev] EBR way of patching class from upstream JAR? |
Roland Grunberg wrote: >> So we need a separate CQ for a modified Lucene Core 5.2.1. Fine. >> >> I just wonder on behalf of which project I should file this CQ, assuming >> that we would still need a *separate* Add-to-Orbit CQ. Should I file a >> CQ on behalf of tools.orbit [1] and then, once that is approved, on >> behalf of tools.orbit another ATO CQ? Seems like a lot of hoops to jump >> through... > > I think any project could file the CQ (ideally not Orbit as we > generally don't file the first CQ itself) and the subsequent ATO CQ > shouldn't take long to complete. Filed the two CQs (for Lucene 5.2.1 and 6.1.0) on behalf of the Code Recommenders project now: <http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13725> <https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13728> Once they have been approved, I will file the ATO CQs and note them in the Gerrit change [1]. Once the ATO CQs are approved, we can submit the Gerrit change and publish a new I-build. Best wishes, Andreas [1] <https://git.eclipse.org/r/98804/> -- Codetrails GmbH The knowledge transfer company Robert-Bosch-Str. 7, 64293 Darmstadt Phone: +49-6151-276-7092 Mobile: +49-170-811-3791 http://www.codetrails.com/ Managing Director: Dr. Marcel Bruch Handelsregister: Darmstadt HRB 91940
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature