[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [orbit-dev] On the need for CQs
|
Hi Jeff,
I'm a little confused... is there a need to file additional
CQs for existing
bundles that had their CQ approved before Orbit got real
and got moved
into Orbit later?
on Tools.Orbit since this lib existed before. Is there a
need to
create it after the fact?
Thanks,
--
Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical
Staff, Wind River
Target Management Project
Lead, DSDP PMC Member
David Williams pointed out an
anomaly the other day. It seems that we have 125+ bundles in the Orbit
builds (including source) but only about 23 CQs in IPzilla related to
tools.orbit. In practice these two numbers should be about the same (after
factoring out the source bundles). The IP process requires a CQ *whenever*
a project chooses to use *any* third party lib regardless of whether or not that
lib has already been approved for use in other projects. AFAIK, this is
true in *all* cases. Once a lib has been approved for one project, other
projects can apply to "reuse" that lib. This reuse process is very quick
and painless and the CQ workflow has a simplified process for entering such
CQs. Given that we appear to be
somewhat out of whack right now, I'm working with Janet and the Foundation to
see how best to get back in line. Regardless, Orbit committers please be
sure to enter the required CQs. We can eliminate questions simply by
saying that every lib added to Orbit must have a bug requesting the addition and
every such bug MUST quote a CQ that is specific to the lib's use in
tools.orbit. Thanks
Jeff p.s., for those of you wondering why we have to do this, it is because
the board wants to know which projects are using which third party code.
This is a notification issue not so much an approval issue. Janet
and friends are just following the process set out for them by the
board.