|Re: [wtp-pmc] Discusion about getting prereq excempt for tools like npm, bower, grunt, typescript, sass, less and others|
On 18/03/2015 4:14 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
The intent is that we would like in JSDT to start integrating with these tools in a similar manner that for example CDT calls out to native compilers
A few comments from the perspective of the EMO:
Which gets us to the hard part....how does the EMO decide whether something is exempt or non-exempt? An exempt pre-req is defined in the policy as ".... if the software is pervasive in nature, expected to be already on the user's machine, and/or an IP review would be either impossible, impractical, or inadvisable." But at the same time, the whole point of the policy is to avoid "... bypassing the IP due diligence process by requiring third party software as a prerequisite where such third party is to be downloaded and installed separately by the user, instead of redistributing such software in their projects."
The kinds of things that we look for are pretty much described in
the policy. But one of the fuzzy things in the policy definition
is "...expected to be already on the user's machine". That's
certainly an area where some judgement is applied, and to where
the intent of the project comes into play. For example, if the
intent of the project is to provide developers tools for the C/C++
language, it is our opinion that it is reasonable to expect that
the developer would already have C/C++ language implementations
installed (e.g. gcc). If the project is providing tools for
Gradle, then surely they are going to need Gradle. And so on....
I don't know too much about the specific projects that Max
development, and they are not actually distributed with the
Eclipse plug-in, then they probably meet the definition of "exempt
I hope that helps.
Back to the top