Re: [technology-pmc] IP process for multiple "same source" contributions

["Mark Stoodley" <mstoodle@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I imagine we could lump several zips together
in a CQ if we're contributing them all at the same time.

But if those contributions happen weeks
or months apart, as these ones are, but they have exactly the same pedigree,
do we really need to file a new CQ or could we maybe augment an earlier
one (with wondrous potential for IP race conditions).

It's kind of a question about the "triage"
activity that the IP folks perform as part of the parallel IP process,
and whether that has much to do with the actual zip file or more about
the info about where it comes from.

Mark Stoodley		8200 Warden Avenue
Senior Software Developer		Markham, L6G 1C7
IBM Runtime Technologies		Canada
Phone:	+1-905-413-5831
e-mail:	mstoodle@xxxxxxxxxx
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them - Albert Einstein

From:      
 Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To:      
 technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date:      
 2016/04/14 01:21 PM
Subject:    
   Re: [technology-pmc]
IP process for multiple "same source" contributions
Sent by:    
   technology-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Hi Mark.

You can post multiple attachments on a single CQ (I think that's what you're
asking). Or you can lump them together as a single contribution. The IP
Team doesn't really care whether or not the contributions are functionally
related. If everything is coming from the same source (IBM), you should
be okay.

You can then push each of those contributions as a separate commits (preserving
author information) if that makes sense.

Does this answer your question?

Wayne

On 14/04/16 12:06 PM, Mark Stoodley wrote:
Hi,

For the OMR project, several committers from IBM have been lining up significant
contributions (> 1000 lines each) from a pre-existing proprietary code
base. IBM is expecting to continue this process through 2016.

We have been filing an individual CQ for each of these contributions and
requesting to use the parallel IP process, but even so our CQs sometimes
take a while to get the necessary approvals to commit to the project repo.

I know the parallel IP process is already streamlining things greatly here,
but is there any way to further streamline the process for these multiple
expected contributions? Since they are all basically the same pedigree
(IBM, multiple authors), is there any way "reuse" one CQ (they
are all still open) so we can move this code into the OMR repository more
efficiently?

Mark Stoodley		8200 Warden Avenue
Senior Software Developer		Markham, L6G 1C7
IBM Runtime Technologies		Canada
Phone:	+1-905-413-5831
e-mail:	mstoodle@xxxxxxxxxx
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them - Albert Einstein

_______________________________________________
technology-pmc mailing list
technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc

-- 
Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation

_______________________________________________
technology-pmc mailing list
technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc