By scheduling your releases for 12/4 (EMF and XSD) and 12/11 (Oomph), you may have discovered a loophole in the Eclipse Development Process requirement to have engaged in a release review no more than one year prior to a major or minor release...
Since you released Eclipse EMF 2.20.0, Eclipse XSD 2.20.0, and Oomph 1.15.0 within a year of the last successful release review, no review is required at this time.
There are several review records on these projects labeled as "pending" (i.e., we never did actually engage in a release review). When you don't do a release review, you don't need to create a review record. I'll delete those "pending" records.
Some of the dates for these new records resulted in problems that
prevent scheduling their reviews. I.e., I plan to do a release
build for EMF/XSD 2.0 today or tomorrow (for consumption by the
platform which does its next RC build on Wednesday).
On 02.12.2019 15:50, Wayne Beaton wrote:
I've updated the records for both Eclipse CDO and
Eclipse EMF Diff/Merge. Thanks for bringing this to my
Note that changes we made to the EDP in late 2018 change
the release review requirements. You only need to engage in a
release review for releases that occur more than one year
after your last successful release review. For most project
teams (i.e., active projects making regular releases), this
means that you only need to engage in a release review once
You still need to create a release record, but you do not
have to engage with the EMO or your PMC, and you don't need to
submit your IP Log. Project leads do need to take care to
ensure that the intellectual property included in all releases
has been fully vetted by the IP due diligence process (that
is, all CQs for content included in a release must be resolved
before making the release official). If you're not sure, then
you can check with the EMO or EMO IP Team.
By way of reminder, if you are
including new bits in this edition of the
simultaneous release, you'll need a release record
that indicates the version that you are
contribution. There's more help in the
If you have not engaged in a
release review in the last year, then you will
need to engage in that process ASAP.
Note that, per the IP Policy
updates approved by the Eclipse Board of Directors
in October 2019, piggyback CQs are no longer
required. I owe you all a much longer discussion
about these changes (which are more extensive than
just not needing piggybacks) which I promise to
provide before the end of the year. I've started
Note also that, even if you are
contributing new bits, but do not require a release
review because you've done one in the last year
already, the intellectual property contained (and
referenced by) your release must be fully vetted by
the IP due diligence process.
The simultaneous release
participation rules require that projects consume
third party content via Eclipse Orbit, so this
shouldn't be a problem for most of you. For those
projects that consume third party content from
outside of Orbit (e.g., those projects that consume
NPM content), or are otherwise unsure of due
diligence status of any of their content, you can
submit an IP Log and I'll take a look.
of Open Source Projects |