Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] IP Due Diligence Process Document

["Sohn, Matthias" <matthias.sohn@xxxxxxx>]

Using ClearlyDefined:

 

s/NOASSERTION appearing a declared license/NOASSERTION appearing as a declared license/

 

 

From: <eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply to: "eclipse.org-architecture-council" <eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, 26. August 2020 at 23:36
To: "eclipse.org-architecture-council" <eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] IP Due Diligence Process Documentation and ClearlyDefined

 

I've made some updates to the IP process documentation in the handbook to try and describe how we use ClearlyDefined.

 

Specifically... Using ClearlyDefined and Due Diligence Process for Prerequisites.

 

I'd like to send a long-overdue note out to the entire committer community. But first, I'd like your input... does what I've added in the handbook make sense to you?

 

FWIW, don't worry about typos. I'll pick them in my next pass.

 

Wayne

--

Wayne Beaton

Director of Open Source Projects | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.

Join us at our virtual event: EclipseCon 2020 - October 20-22