Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [rt-pmc] ECF 3.9.0

I'm curious. If ECF has no dependency on this library, then why even bring it up?

If the library is required by Equinox and not directly referenced/linked/called/implemented/used/considered/whatever by ECF, and ECF is distributing Equinox, then no CQ is required.

No CQ required:

ECF -> Equinox -> OSGi

CQ required:

ECF -> OSGi

We'll need to review the IP Log.

If you're going to make the desired release date, then we need to get this all together today. We need the IP Log submitted for review and approval of the review documentation of the PMC.

We'll open a bug to track (as usual).

HTH,

Wayne

On 07/23/2014 02:12 PM, slewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 7/23/2014 4:12 PM, Wayne Beaton wrote:
I believe that a piggyback CQ is required.
Done:  https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8495

You require a CQ if you directly use the code (e.g. you import a
package, call an API, implement an interface, ...). You can get away
without if you're only indirectly using it through Equinox APIs.

I don't think this falls naturally into either of above, as these are
classes defined by OSGi spec (compendium/enterprise sections in this
case), and implemented by OSGi alliance, but distributed by ECF (for RSA)
and Equinox (for other parts of spec...e.g. ds) as they are required
dependencies for spec implementations (like ECF RSA).

The piggy back CQ is opened as requested.

Scott

You require a CQ if you directly use the code (e.g. you import a
package, call an API, implement an interface, ...). You can get away
without if you're only indirectly using it through Equinox APIs.

Wayne

On 07/23/2014 07:43 AM, slewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Oh... and we need IP Log approval.
The only change from the IP log submitted for ECF 3.8.1 in March is the
OSGi code dependency, which is managed by Thomas for Equinox...i.e. via
CQ:

https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5786

I'm not sure how everyone wants to handle this somewhat special case
(i.e.
code/packages for impls of OSGi specs)...up until now we've simply
depended upon Thomas for the OSGi companion code updates, but I suppose
this could be split out and I could do it separately for RS/RSA if
required...but I don't want to create work for anyone.

Please advise.

Scott




--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation
<http://www.eclipse.org>
Learn about Eclipse Projects <http://www.eclipse.org/projects>
EclipseCon Europe 2014 <https://www.eclipsecon.org/europe2014>




--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects, The Eclipse Foundation
Learn about Eclipse Projects
EclipseCon
          Europe 2014

Back to the top