Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [tools-pmc] [CQ 9378] Gradle all versions - request for exempt pre-req

+1

Sooner or later we need to be doing the right thing for the user. If vendors don’t like how things are set up, they’re free to not adopt those things in their products. And I’m sure the Eclipse Foundation legal staff is looking out for the well being of the foundation and board.

Doug.

From: Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: The Eclipse Foundation
Reply-To: Tools PMC mailing list <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 9:40 AM
To: "tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx" <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [tools-pmc] [CQ 9378] Gradle all versions - request for exempt pre-req

I commented on the CQ that we really need this to be approved for future versions as well. It really hamstrings to the whole use of Gradle otherwise.

I suggested that we limit it to all past, present, and future versions released under the terms of the ALv2.

For completeness, I'm not on the PMC so this doesn't count as a vote.

Wayne

On 17/03/15 10:45 AM, Doug Schaefer wrote:
Sorry, you are correct. The whole gradle topic is a bit touchy so please let us know what you think.

Doug.

From: David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Tools PMC mailing list <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 10:39 AM
To: Tools PMC mailing list <tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [tools-pmc] [CQ 9378] Gradle all versions - request for exempt pre-req

PMC members,

I believe for "exempt prereqs" we are supposed to "discuss on mailing list" or in a meeting with documented notes. (So, I vote for the mailing list :)

I'll give my "conditional" +1 ... conditional only on clarifying what "all versions" means, which I assume means "version 2.3 or any prior version" (just because, I'm not sure it's fair to "approve future, unknown versions" (in theory, the license terms might change, or something?).

Doug has already +1'd the CQ (which is fine, I'm just saying that's two of us).

Any other comments?

Thanks,




From:        emo-ip-team@xxxxxxxxxxx
To:        tools-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx,
Date:        03/16/2015 12:22 PM
Subject:        [tools-pmc] [CQ 9378] Gradle all versions
Sent by:        tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx




http://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9378


Sharon Corbett <sharon.corbett@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

          What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                CC|                            |sharon.corbett@xxxxxxxxxxx
          Severity|awaiting_committer          |awaiting_pmc




--- Comment #2 from Sharon Corbett <sharon.corbett@xxxxxxxxxxx>  2015-03-16 12:22:20 ---
PMC:  For your +1 in order that we may process.  

Please note, the Gradle runtime has been discussed with EMO as an exempt
prereq.

Kind Regards,
Sharon




Auto-Generated Text:  IPTeam awaiting response from PMC.


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




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

--
Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation

Back to the top