Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] IPZilla rant

[Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I've added a comment on the bug.

We have a work around for NPM by which you can include all of your "Type A" third party content in a single CQ. Send a note to emo-ip-team@xxxxxxxxxxx for help.

We've just started working on an update to the IP Policy. Updating the process and tools will be part of that work. I owe the architecture council a report on our progress.

Wayne

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 5:13 AM Mickael Istria <mistria@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi all,

I'm dealing with a bunch of CQ submissiosn today. As usual, since I hate doing this action that costs me a lot of time, I tried to think about potential improvement to save some time ( https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=546764 ),

IIRC, we talked some months ago of a strategy to list specific bugs that we think should deserve an investment from the Eclipse Foundation in order to make the process more straightforward and less expensive to committers. But I don't recall what it is. Is there a tag we should put on the bug? Or a umbrella bug we should link as a dependency?

Thanks in advance

_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://www.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

Director of Open Source Projects | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.