[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [rt-pmc] Virgo testcase dependencies
|
I have raised the first such Virgo CQ 4083 ([1]) for LGPL testcase dependencies. It is generic in nature as with the "blanket" CQs below. I would like to progress this further ASAP before raising similar CQs to cover the other relevant licenses.
PMC: please would someone who attended the last call approve this?
Barb: if genie asks for source to be attached, please would you mark the CQ as not requiring this.
Glyn
[1] https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4083
On 5 May 2010, at 15:05, Glyn Normington wrote:
This topic was discussed on today's RT PMC call. The conclusion was that "works with" CQs are necessary for these dependencies.
If it is possible to combine some of these dependencies into broad categories, then these could be covered with "blanket" CQs as below, but each blanket CQ could only express dependencies under a single license.
Glyn
On 4 May 2010, at 09:48, Glyn Normington wrote:
I would like the RT PMC to advise me what kind of CQs, if any, are required to cover the testcase dependencies of Virgo.
Virgo supports a wide range of third party bundles such as ORM mapping bundles (some with LGPL license), web technology bundles, and various other miscellaneous bundles. Virgo has no direct dependency on these bundles, but has completely general support for third party bundles which address various issues such as load time weaving and thread context class loading which commonly arise with such bundles.
In order to test this support, Virgo includes a number of testcases which comprise applications which use such third party bundles. These bundles are downloaded by the Virgo build system when the testcases are built and run. These bundles are not checked in to source control and are not distributed with Virgo.
Initially it seemed that no CQ would be required, but then it was suggested that "works with" or "exempt pre-req" CQs would be required. There are also other examples of completely general situations handled by "blanket" CQs:
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3694
https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2775
Apparently it is the PMC's decision, hence this post.
Thanks,
Glyn
_______________________________________________
rt-pmc mailing list
rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
_______________________________________________
rt-pmc mailing list
rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
