|
On 2016-08-11 12:00 PM, Oberhuber,
Martin wrote:
On the topic of the changes to the IP Policy (section pasted
below)....
At the moment there is no intent to include the IP review type (Type
A vs. Type B) in the project branding. It will be shown to users in
places like the PMI project metadata, the PMI release record, and
the release IP Log. But there is no need to include it in the
project branding, nor in the naming of release artifacts like zip
and jar files. Type A projects are full Eclipse projects, and are in
no way second class citizens.
Orbit will continue to include only those libraries which have
completed the full Eclipse IP review.
BTW, the new process will actually be quite different than the
parallel IP process. The parallel IP process is basically optimistic
concurrency --- eventually the work gets done. Type A is just don't
do the prereq scanning work at all. That's a big difference.
Wayne: Changes to IP Policy
EF is working on a
change to the IP Policy as blogged by Mike recently
- Introducing
a new, lighter-weight type of due diligence (license check on
contained code only - no provenance)
- Only
check what a project "claims" for Type A releases, but not
check if it's actually true
- Projects
could choose to be "Type A" or "Type B" per release
- Expecting
that Vertex would move to Type A ... others to do some
releases Type A, and at some point do Type B
- Sounds
very similar to "parallel IP process" -- how to
mark up what is what? How to deal with aggregates as being
Type A or Type B ?
- Wayne:
Mature projects couldn't be Type B - only for Incubating
ones. Helps them work out which software / licenses they
actually need.
|
