Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipselink-dev] Re: Code submission


This process issue was corrected as a result of my email on Oct 30th  (, and has since been officially changed in the recently created EPS process doc (  I think this was a simple misinterpretation of the rules.

I'd like to think that Wayne and I (the mentors) have helped out quite a bit over the last several months, but I will try to keep a closer eye on process related issues to make sure things don't get off track. 


Mike Milinkovich wrote:



Some additional background: contributions via mail lists, newsgroups, wiki and bugzilla are all covered under the Terms of Use (which is actually a little broader than the EPL, a subtle but important point). The reason why we ask that contributions come in via Bugzilla is that when you become a Bugzilla user, you register and agree to the Terms of Use. It’s just a little extra comfort for the legal types. Plus, as I mentioned before Bugzilla is where most of the interesting conversations happen J


To be honest, I’m not entirely sure that this is written in the IP Policy. I believe it is documented in the development process “How To’s”. But it is most certainly a best practice for tracking IP provenance, and the convention used throughout Eclipse.


I’ve asked this before: who are EPS’s mentors? A lot of these helpful hints should be provided by them. Even if our documentation was absolutely perfect --- and its not --- there is a lot to digest and we had hoped that the mentors would be a valuable resource for new projects starting up.


From: eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Douglas Clarke
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 9:51 AM
To: Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services; Tom Ware
Cc: Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services
Subject: Re: [eclipselink-dev] Re: Code submission



Thanks for clarifying what the issue was with original email. We will review the IP policy again and ensure our evolving development process conforms. I was under the impression that all email and newgroup posts were covered under EPL.

We are transitioning to a bugzilla centric process where attachements to the bugs can be used for communicated proposed changes for peer review/discussion and track completed changes.



From Bjorn Freeman-Benson <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Sent Thu 01/11/2007 7:17 PM

To Tom Ware <tom.ware@xxxxxxxxxx>

Cc Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services <eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Subject Re: [eclipselink-dev] Re: Code submission


Tom, Doug,
No, it wasn't calling it a "code submission" that was the problem that caught my eye: it was including the patch in the email (  The patch needed to be attached to a bug, not be in an email; that's an IP process rule.

- Bjorn

P.S. You can call it whatever you want :-)

Tom Ware wrote:

 In this case, the issue is just the choice of words for the subject line.

 Guy is a committer and contributing a relatively small change to the code base that he has developed himself.  I guess we should be careful not to use the words "Code Submission" when adding this kind of code.


[end of message]

eclipselink-dev mailing list

_______________________________________________ eclipselink-dev mailing list eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

Back to the top