-----Original Message-----
From: eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Neil Hauge
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 9:26 PM
To: mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx; Dev mailing list for Eclipse
Persistence Services
Subject: Re: [eclipselink-dev] Re: Code submission
Mike,
This process issue was corrected as a result of my email on Oct 30th (http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipselink-dev/msg00240.html),
and has since been officially changed in the recently created EPS process doc (http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink/Development/Process).
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.
Neil
Mike Milinkovich wrote:
Doug,
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.
Bjorn,
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.
Sent Thu 01/11/2007 7:17 PM
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 (http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipselink-dev/msg00219.html).
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.
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
