I missed this the first time through
    
      
Wayne: Mature projects couldn't be Type B
        - only for Incubating ones. Helps them work out which software /
        licenses they actually need.
      I don't think that this is what I said.
    The phase of the project is separate from the type of IP due
      diligence used in any particular release.
    
    I did suggest a couple of scenarios...
    * A project starts with Type A and stays with Type A for its
      entire lifespan
    * A project starts with Type A and changes to Type B when it
      graduates
    * A project does multiple releases with Type A and a periodic
      release with Type B.
    The point is that the project can decide what level of due
      diligence to bring for a release.
    I also suggested that this will likely result in the IP team
      doing due diligence on what the project demonstrates they actually
      need as they get closer to the release with Type B, rather than
      what they think they need the beginning of a release cycle like we
      do today.
    FWIW, I find it easier to think about this as a has-a
      relationship, i.e. a particular release has a type of IP due
      diligence rather than a particular release is a Type A release.
    I still think that the blood type analogy works really well and
      am disappointed at the lack of uptake.
    
      HTH,
    
      Wayne
    
    
    
    
    On 11/08/16 03:21 PM, Mike Milinkovich
      wrote:
    
    
      
      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.
 
      
      
      
      _______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.
    
    
    -- 
      Wayne Beaton
      @waynebeaton
      The Eclipse Foundation