[rt-pmc] [CQ 4086] logback classic Version: 0.9.18 (PB CQ3651)

[emo-ip-team@xxxxxxxxxxx]

http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4086


Thomas Watson <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx




--- Comment #2 from Thomas Watson <tjwatson@xxxxxxxxxx>  2010-05-11 11:43:50 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Description:    The Virgo medic component depends on logback classic. Although
> the
> source code of logback classic is not modified by Virgo, a Virgo aspect is
> woven
> into logback classic to enable Virgo\'s in-memory logging function. For this
> reason, this CQ is flagged as modifying the code. Note that it is not
> appropriate or necessary to contribute the aspect to the LogBack project as the
> aspect is adding orthogonal function.

I'm not sure this has come up before.  I would approve the cq based on the
approval of the piggyback CQ already approved but I am not sure what EPL
requires as far as weaving classes to add functionality vs. patching the source
and rebuilding the classes to include new functionality (orthogonal or not). 
The end result seems to be the same.  We will ship class files that are
modified from the original to add some bit of function.

To me it seems like the changes we make to the class files would need to be
contributed back and it makes no difference what mechanism we used to modify
the actual class files.  Am I missing something? 


-- 
Configure CQmail: http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the CQ.