Maybe I misled someone here - we (the EMO) only need an IP review when
a piece of code is moving from one project to another project, not when
the same project is changing repository types (CVS -> SVN). And the
IP review for moving code from one project to another is just to verify
that the IP issues are the same in destination project - it's not a
full Release Review style IP review.
The issue is this: if the code is moving from an incubating project and
is under parallel ip (thus not yet reviewed) and is moving to a project
that is post-review, then the moving code could bring the destination
project backwards in terms of "IP cleanliness". If both projects are
incubating, it's a no brainer. If the moving code has been reviewed
(even if the source project has not), it's a no brainer. Even if the
issue of "dirty" code comes up, all that needs to happen is for Janet's
team to flag it in their files so that when a release review comes
around it's checked again.
Sorry to have muddied the waters - hope this email helps,
Pete Mackie wrote:
At 09:10 AM 10/15/2007, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Pete Mackie wrote:
Also, the Eclipse Foundation would require a complete IP audit of all
source code moving over to a SVN repository as the CVS source code
transistion records are being replaced. At least, I suggest checking
with Bjorn on this matter.
Not sure I understand why IP would be involved when moving source from
one Eclipse repo to another. We (Buckminster) did not do this and the
issue never came up when we moved. Nothing is added to the code so why
would this matter from an IP standpoint?
Good question! I can't answer this. I was only repeating what Bjorn
stated to me, via email, a little over a year ago when I was proposing
moving the ECF code from a CVS to SVN repository.
I'll defer this question to Bjorn. Perhaps its no longer an issue for
the Eclipse Foundation.