Re: [incubation] clarification request for when CQs are needed

[Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Mark.

Content authored by a project committer falls under Figure #1 of the IP Due Diligence Process [1] which covers:

Written 100% by
Submitting Committer
or Committer on same
Project under the
supervision of the PMC

The real question, I think, is how do we define "under the supervision of the PMC". If the content was authored after the individual became a committer, provides functionality that is within the scope of the project, has been developed in an open and transparent manner, and the PMC could otherwise reasonably expect this sort of content to arrive, then you're good. If you already have a bug open to track and discuss the contribution, you have a slam-dunk.

A counter example might be some content that you've pulled out of an old archive that existed before the project was created, or if the committer disappeared for a month and arrived back with a huge contribution that nobody expected.

Assuming that this content was authored after the developer gained committer status, my assessment is that you don't need a CQ.

Does this help?

What's with the poke at Markdown? Did Markdown stop being cool? Did I miss a memo?

Wayne

[1] https://www.eclipse.org/legal/EclipseLegalProcessPoster.pdf

On 24/03/16 12:21 PM, Mark Stoodley wrote:

If a project committer makes a significant (say > 1000 lines of code) contribution and the contribution is "new" content (by which I mean a completely new file or piece of content; not modifications to existing content in the project), does that necessarily count as an "initial contribution" under the IP process?

The specific example we've got is the contribution of our coding standard, which is more than 1000 lines (yeah, I know) of markdown.  Up until this point, we did not have a documented coding standard, so technically it's "new content" but I have to admit, I felt kind of silly opening a CQ for it (which I did anyway under the guise of "better safe than sorry" : see https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11134if you're really interested).

It was contributed by a project committer so doesn't directly fall under the "> 1000 lines" rule for non committers.

Do we need a CQ for such content?

Later on, one of our committers will be contributing several hundred thousand lines of Just In Time compiler code. That code, I will obviously treat as "initial contribution", but looking for some guidance on where the threshold is for this kind of thing and how pedantic I should be about it.

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

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

--
Wayne Beaton
@waynebeaton
The Eclipse Foundation