Cool. So in theory, you can just zip up your node_modules directory and attach that. And if you set up your package.json properly with dependencies versus devDependencies, you can do a yarn –prod to get the ones you redistribute. That would
be pretty easy if the IP team is OK with that.
I think over time, as more Eclipse projects want to do things with npm, the knowledge will spread. The incubation mailing list is a great place for people unfamiliar with the processes to ask questions and we’ve been pretty good at answering
them. We’ll get there.
From: eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Mickael Istria
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2018 10:02 AM
To: eclipse.org-architecture-council <eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] IPZilla rant
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Denis Roy <denis.roy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You could ask the IP Team. The problem with making things "explicit" is that it turns into documentation that no one reads and must be maintained.
Food for thought. Many projects engage with the IP team before embarking on the task, to make sure they're doing it the most efficient way (for themselves, and for the IP Team).
So it seems like we agree that the couple PMI/IPZilla -which happens to be the main entry point for IP stuff- is often not the most efficient way to submit a new block of dependencies and that sending mail to IP team is usually better ;)
If so, my opinion would be to just remove IPZilla, replace it with a spread sheet or a database maintained by IP team for tracking, and have all IP requests sent by email to IP team to have them advise about about how to best take care of it.