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

[Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the feedback. I've fixed the typo identified by Matthias in the source.

 why the overall score does not matter. 

The short version is that we really only care about the license data. Theoretically, incomplete metadata ("described data") could impact the license data, but our requirement that there actually be license data has--in my experience--mitigated this risk. We're still learning our way through this, so it's possible that we may discover that we want to have more assurances that, for example, the source pointer is accurate.

I'll see what I can do to tweak the text. Your link suggestion is a good one.

I think the EDP should be a bit more explicit 

FWIW, this is more about our implementation of the IP Policy than the EDP. 

I've been putting off getting our content into the repository. In fact, I wasn't aware that they'd harvested any of JDT.

So... here's the really cool thing about ClearlyDefined: you can assist in the curation directly in the interface. I've updated the metadata (I gave them a pointer to the commit that contains the actual source code for that version) and fixed the license information. By fixing the source code pointer, the harvester will take another crack at it, so we should have better and more complete data before too long.

The curation manifests as a pull request. They have a group of curators who validate and apply the changes (at some point, our IP Team will put some efforts into getting these privileges). This sort of curation works well on a case-by-case basis, but is a bit of a PITA for wholesale changes of multiple libraries and versions. 

Getting all of our content in there has been on my list for a while, but low priority.

Wayne

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 3:36 PM Jonah Graham <jonah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Wayne,

I have had a read through - and for the first time I appreciated the different scores. I think the numerous scores leave lots of questions open as a "bad" overall score does not matter.

For example, a dep can have a decent license score, but a terrible described score. I am using https://clearlydefined.io/definitions/npm/npmjs/-/babel-preset-gatsby/0.5.8 as an example because it was one of the featured items on the clearly defined home page (I included a screenshot below in case the URL's data is mutable). 

In this case licensed is 75 and license is only MIT. So this is OK despite the very poor Described score?

If I understood correctly, I think the EDP should be a bit more explicit why the overall score does not matter. Also, perhaps a link to https://docs.clearlydefined.io/clearly#licensed  would help.

----

A related topic is that I suppose it would be nice if Eclipse's own stuff had a decent score. JDT core has a 100 described score, but 0 for license (NOASSERTION). https://clearlydefined.io/definitions/maven/mavencentral/org.eclipse.jdt/org.eclipse.jdt.core/3.22.0

Thanks,

Jonah

~~~
Jonah Graham
Kichwa Coders
www.kichwacoders.com

On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 17:36, Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

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

_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council

_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council

--

Wayne Beaton

Director of Open Source Projects | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.

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