|RE: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Europa CQs 01.11.2007.xls|
Hi Janet and all,
first of all thanks for all your hard and diligent work ensuring we have clean IP
at Eclipse! I have sent you the editied spreadsheet for dsdp.tm directly.
But let me also say that I'm sort of alarmed by the fact that the cutoff date for 3rd
party contributions (are these any non-committer contributions?) is Jan.31st for a
release targeted end of June. It made me add a "virtual" contribution that has not
been filed yet due to internal reviews at IBM but that we'll definitely need for Europa.
Taking into account that one of the contributions from us in the queue is a plain-EPL
contribution of newly written code from Montavista, and this has been waiting for
2 months now, I'm fearing that we are threatening community contributions away,
thus becoming an elitary club rather than real community. Such contributions are
written and donated in good spirit, trying to help - and then we just cannot accept
them due to lack of resources. Is there a bottleneck? How does that compare to
other Open Source initiatives like Apache or Sourceforge? Is there a problem
with the model we have for contributions and, especially, redistribution
of 3rd party IP in the form of libraries?
The other thing that's alarming me is that it looks like a good deal of the hard-felt
work of our IP experts is getting the management of those items in the queue
that just can't be finished quickly -- work time that's so much needed.
I'm not blaming any of you faithful folks from the IP department, I'm sure that
all your diligence is very much needed and you're doing your very best to be of good
service. But it feels like there's a desperate need for good ideas how to improve things.
Perhaps it would help to find ways how we can better leverage and pull 3rd party
libraries out of their native homes at runtime rather than investing so much time
into finding out whether we can redistribute them ourselves? - Anybody with
good ideas please speak up!
Back to the top