Fw: [cross-project-issues-dev] Remember to update your feature.propertie

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

In case anyone hasn't noticed, the Eclipse
Foundation has issued a new SUA document. 

So, for those of you who acted quickly
to this request on 4/7, then you'll be 
well practiced to easily do it again?
:/  

And, for the rest of you, then you've
just been reinforced for procrastinating. :) 

Please revisit bug 306627 for details
and exact text to use. 
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=306627

Sorry for the churn. The new SUA is
not radically different, but has some 
important clarifications about implications
of Eclipse's provisioning system. 
Well, you know ... important for legal
reasons, hence required for us. 

And, in case you are wondering, yes
it was considered to "push back" on 
this request, but I think there is just
enough time to accommodate it, without 
endangering our Simultaneous Release
so best to take advantage of 
the timing to get current and consistent.


Much thanks, 




----- Forwarded by David
M Williams/Raleigh/IBM on 04/21/2010 10:16 AM -----

From:	David M Williams/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
To:	cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date:	04/07/2010 02:03 PM
Subject:	[cross-project-issues-dev] Remember to update your feature.properties file, to use consistent licensing text
Sent by:	cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

As I'm sure you are all aware, a new Helios Requirement this year is to
use consistent license text, so the "license acceptance" dialog
can be made more meaningful and easier to use. 

And, that's _exactly_ consistent license text ... same year, same text,
same capitalization. (I've heard consecutive white space doesn't matter,
but why push it?). 

So, yes, this does means almost all of us have to change. 

See bug 306627 for some details on this topic, and the exact text to use.
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=306627

Of course, this applies to those features that use the Eclipse SUA and
if someone was shipping a feature in Helios that didn't use that, then
you wouldn't want to change yours .... but, then I'd wonder why it was
in Helios? 

For reference, see http://eclipse.org/legal/guidetolegaldoc.php
for details on the legally required documents ... but, this Helios requirement
goes beyond the minimum requirement and gets us all to use the exact same
text, so the software can tell when its really the same license. 
If you try to get the "standard text" from the website, you need
to be careful to get the plain HTML and ASCII versions, make sure there's
no web encoding conversion errors, etc., so probably easiest to get from
the bugzilla entry. 

One disturbing angle that's come up, while some checked if we all use the
same text, is that some of you are not using ANY (yet).  That is really
a big "no no" and would be a "stop ship" issue, if
found "at the last minute" (as far as I know, 
it should be a stop ship issue even for milestones, etc ... but, I'm not
here to judge ... yet). 

So, let's try to get this all corrected for M7, so we don't have to monkey
around with this routine level of detail for release candidates. Plus,
if you fix yours for M7, that'll make all the slackers really standout
in M7 and we can more easily see who they are :) 

Much Thanks, 
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev