I agree with Abel that it seems like
overkill to get PMC approval on all fixes (including simple ones) provided
by non-committers. Has this always been the process in Eclipse? I
would think not given the volume of contributions typically received. The
committer guidelines statement seems more reasonable than the information
provided on the IP poster. Does it make a difference if the non-committers
are employees of the same company as the submitting committer?
Actually, in rereading the poster, it
does say "all code" at the top. Does this include any code
contributed for any fix/enhancement, even by committers? Does "under
the supervision of the PMC" mean the same thing as having each defect/enhancement
individually approved by the PMC? I can't imagine this doing anything
but reducing progress to a slow crawl.
technology-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 11/26/2008
> There is currently a flag on bugzilla (in the attachmen details) for
> "review". I'm not sure if that's useful for this case. Otherwise,
> maybe we can manually CC this list on bugzilla when requesting a
> review and the PMC can remove it after approving.
> On the other hand, I've kept looking at IP information and found that:
> "For simple bug fixes and minor enhancements contributed under
> ... which is the opposite of what's written on the top of the IP Poster.
> The list of bugs with patches is currently 15 (http://tinyurl.com/iam-patches
> ) so once we have cleared if they need PMC approval or not, and how
> request it, we will start processing them.
> Abel Muiño (IAM project lead)
> El 26/11/2008, a las 20:04, Wayne Beaton escribió:
> > "Code" means everything you check into CVS/SVN or make
> > part of a download. So images, XML, etc. are subject to IP review.
> > The easiest way to get PMC approval is to ask on this mailing
> > It occurs to me that this mailing list is relatively difficult
> > use for these purposes. As a general rule, I don't imagine that
> > there are many non-PMC folks who really want/need to listen to
> > list. So... in order to communicate with the PMC, you need to
> > subscribe to this list for the duration of your communcation.
> > the while, you have to listen to our mindless banter on other
> > I'm thinking that we might consider adding the Bugzilla mail
> > to the PMC mailing list and inviting people to cc the technology-pmc
> > on bugs that they want our input on. We could then do the short-term
> > communication through the bug (copied on to the list, naturally)
> > then remove ourselves from cc when our input is no longer required.
> > The architecture council does this currently.
> > Thoughts?
> > Wayne
> > Abel Muiño Vizcaino wrote:
> >> Hello PMC:
> >> I've just realized this sentence on the IP poster: "All
> >> be approved by your PMC".
> >> How should we handle that? We have several bugs with attached
> >> from non-committers, some of them are small (<250 lines)
and do not
> >> require IP review.
> >> Also, I'm not sure if by "code" it also refers
to "non source
> >> code" (xml, images, build scripts...)
> >> Thanks!
> >> Abel.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> technology-pmc mailing list
> >> technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc
> > _______________________________________________
> > technology-pmc mailing list
> > technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc
> technology-pmc mailing list