Hi Jody.
The Technology Top-Level project is an umbrella. But it's more than
that. The Project Management Committee (PMC) is responsible for
ensuring that projects are functioning in accordance with the
development process and following IP rules.
"Works with" CQs (defined in [1]) let a project, for example, make
use of libraries that might not otherwise be approved by the IP
process and so additional oversight and tracking is required. For
completeness, "works with" dependencies should not be distributed
directly by the project.
For "works with" dependencies, we require that the use of the
dependency be discussed in a public forum by the PMC. Generally, the
preferred forum is the PMC's mailing list
(technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx in this case). Over time, as more
projects join LocationTech, the PMC list will become a more obvious
place to hold these discussions.
In the case of the NSIS installer, as a PMC member, I would ask, for
example, about the nature the output of running the tool. Does it
generate output that contains NSIS IP that we'd be distributing. I'd
assume that in the process of generating an installer, some form of
installation technology would be included in the output. That only
matters, of course, if the installer is actually being used by the
build to generate output that is intended to be distributed from
locationtech.org.
More often, however, these discussions tend to be short.
For "normal" prerequisite dependencies (that will be subject to the
full IP due diligence process), the PMC only needs to sign off on
the CQ itself. Notification of these CQs will be sent to the PMC
mailing list, but no additional discussion needs to happen there.
At this point, the distinction between the PMC and the uDig project
is pretty thin, given that uDig is currently the only project under
LocationTech Technology.
I apologize that the discussion regarding the move of the existing
uDig mailing list was stalled. We've never moved a mailing list
before, so we've gotten a little hung up on the potential legal
issues around terms of use. I've escalated the issue.
Wayne
[1]
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_Policy_and_Procedure_for_3rd_Party_Dependencies_Final.pdf
On 06/11/2013 07:46 PM, Jody Garnett
wrote:
So given that we have many
dependencies to go through, some of which predate the
formation of a PMC what do you advise we do?
a) link to the email
conversation where the dependency was discussed on the mailing
list?
b) Have a discussion like this
one where the current PMC confirm the dependency is
acceptable?
Sounds like an email
discussion is needed, ideally I would like to migrate the this
udig-devel email list over to location tech, while
I have raised a ticket so far nothing has come of it? The
archives are here (http://lists.refractions.net/pipermail/udig-devel/)
with each month being available as a gripped text file for
import.
On Wednesday, 12 June 2013 at 2:40 AM,
Wayne Beaton wrote:
I think that you mean "PMC" (Project Management
Committee).
Sharon is asking for proof that the LocationTech PMC has
publicly discussed the designation of NSIS as a build and
test dependency.
Build and test dependencies are categorized as a "works
with" dependency as defined in the Guidelines for the
Review of Third-Party Dependencies.
http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_Policy_and_Procedure_for_3rd_Party_Dependencies_Final.pdf
Which states (in part):
It will be the responsibility of each PMC to
document all "works with" and "prerequisite"
dependencies between Eclipse Foundation code and
non-Eclipse Foundation code. As part of
this process, the PMCs will be expected to make a
determination whether a dependency is a
“works with” or a “prerequisite”.
Essentially, the PMC needs to discuss the nature of the
dependency, and document their decision (in a public
forum).
For many such requests, the PMC members weigh in with
simple +1. Here's an example of what this often looks
like:
http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/technology-pmc/msg04300.html
This link was pasted in a comment on the corresponding
IPZilla record.
Normally, this discussion occurs in the PMC mailing list
(i.e.
https://www.locationtech.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc),
but there's no specific rule in that regard. We can start
this discussion here if you'd prefer.
Wayne
On 06/11/2013 04:57 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Wayne do you have
any guidance on this one?
I have a
confusing request from Sharon with respect to our
use of NSIS installer. She asks to be pointed at
the decision by the PSC to use NSIS as a build
tool.
There are two ways
for me to read this:
1) Request to
point to a historical discussion?
As such it kind of
predates the formation of a PSC.
The installer
was originally contributed by Chris Holmes for
uDig 0.4.
Searching down
the details:
Aside: thanks to
Chris Holmes
2) Request to
interact with the Eclipse Developer Portal
She may also be
asking us to use the developer portal to vote on
the dependency request (i.e. I have submitted it
as a request to the IP team, perhaps the next step
is for the PSC to approve my request?)
--
|
