Re: [orbit-dev] Continue to require ATO CQs?

[Roland Grunberg <rgrunber@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 9:51 PM Jonah Graham <jonah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Should Orbit continue to require ATO CQs now that the new IP process does not require CQs for third-party bundles that pass clearlydefined checks?

If the new IP process does not require a CQ for most bundles now, then we
should be fine to not file them. It would still be nice to insert some
value in the
Orbit CQ column indicating that ClearlyDefined should be checked for licesning
information. I think we'll also have to relax that constraint on
ebr-maven-plugin
that require a CQ be entered.

Cheers,
Roland Grunberg