Eclipse Dash issueshttps://gitlab.eclipse.org/groups/eclipse/technology/dash/-/issues2020-11-25T19:34:45Zhttps://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/56Add discussion regarding why one might consider creating a subproject2020-11-25T19:34:45ZEclipse WebmasterAdd discussion regarding why one might consider creating a subproject## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#510539)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=510539)**
## Description
Consider adding some discussion regarding the pros and cons of creating subprojects. S...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#510539)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=510539)**
## Description
Consider adding some discussion regarding the pros and cons of creating subprojects. Some thoughts:
* Subprojects are basically projects
* Project members have no intrinsic role in the matters of their subprojects
* All projects bear a maintenance/administrative burden
* Subprojects have a distinct committer list; finer-grained control over resourceshttps://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/55[faq] Project websites and IP Due Diligence2021-08-19T20:04:01ZEclipse Webmaster[faq] Project websites and IP Due Diligence## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#510376)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=510376)**
## Description
We need to provide some guidance regarding intellectual property due diligence and pro...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#510376)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=510376)**
## Description
We need to provide some guidance regarding intellectual property due diligence and project websites.
From the POV of our due diligence process, website content is separate from project code. We expect project teams to respect licenses for all web site content, but do not require (or desire) that they submit website content (including third party libraries) for review by the IP Team.
This is true regardless of where the website content is stored.
If website content is included in project code builds, then it is considered project code and so is subject to the due diligence process.
### Blocking
* [Bug 499707](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=499707)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/54Add a "Getting Started" checklist2022-05-10T15:11:11ZEclipse WebmasterAdd a "Getting Started" checklist## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#510310)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=510310)**
## Description
We have a bit of a start on this in the "Starting an Open Source Project at Eclipse" s...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#510310)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=510310)**
## Description
We have a bit of a start on this in the "Starting an Open Source Project at Eclipse" section, but it's pretty high level and glosses over detail.
Further, having a more comprehensive check list gives us an opportunity to ensure that projects get off on the right foot.
Entries in the list should include:
* Ensure that all project committers have an Eclipse Foundation account;
After provisioning:
* Set up legal documentation (LICENSE.TXT) and about files;
* Add a CONTRIBUTING document;
* Upload your project logo
### Blocking
* [Bug 440244](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=440244)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/53Add an Intellectual Property FAQ entry regarding whether or not an IP Log nee...2020-11-25T19:34:39ZEclipse WebmasterAdd an Intellectual Property FAQ entry regarding whether or not an IP Log needs to be respun## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#509610)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=509610)**
## Description
There is some confusion regarding whether or not a project team needs to respin an IP ...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#509610)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=509610)**
## Description
There is some confusion regarding whether or not a project team needs to respin an IP Log if they make a change between the time the IP log is approved and they actually ship release bits.
Specifically, there is a misunderstanding that the IP Log must exactly match the IP that's in the release bits.
--
Q: We submitted an IP Log for our release, but we've made some changes since then that will end up in the release, should we resubmit the IP Log?
A: The purpose of the IP Log review is to checkpoint the IP Due Diligence Process and ensure that nothing is slipping through the cracks; an IP Log is not intended to be an accurate reflection of exactly what is in any particular release.
--
### Blocking
* [Bug 499707](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=499707)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/52Provide instructions for getting funds for project logo design2020-11-25T19:34:33ZEclipse WebmasterProvide instructions for getting funds for project logo design## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#509175)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=509175)**
## Description
The Eclipse Foundation can provide funding for projects that want to create a logo. We...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#509175)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=509175)**
## Description
The Eclipse Foundation can provide funding for projects that want to create a logo. We need to describe that process. We should perhaps also include some discussion of this in the "Starting a Project" section.https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/51Add a pointer to the IP Log Generator in the "IP Log Generator" section2020-11-25T19:34:31ZEclipse WebmasterAdd a pointer to the IP Log Generator in the "IP Log Generator" section## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#509114)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=509114)**
## Description
We do have a pointer (instructions, actually) to the IP Log Generator in the "Release ...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#509114)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=509114)**
## Description
We do have a pointer (instructions, actually) to the IP Log Generator in the "Release Reviews" section. It seems obvious to include that same pointer in the "IP Log Generator" section.
### Blocking
* [Bug 499707](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=499707)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/50Provide more help for creating and editing release records2020-11-25T19:34:29ZEclipse WebmasterProvide more help for creating and editing release records## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508758)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508758)**
## Description
Tighten the connection between the section on Releases [1] and the content regarding r...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508758)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508758)**
## Description
Tighten the connection between the section on Releases [1] and the content regarding releases in the PMI [2]. Consider including an overview of the process and--perhaps--a screenshot or two (doing this in a forge-independent manner will be challenging).
[1] https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#release-review
[2] https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#pmi-releaseshttps://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/49Provide guidance regarding the use of IP in milestone builds2020-11-25T19:34:27ZEclipse WebmasterProvide guidance regarding the use of IP in milestone builds## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508554)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508554)**
## Description
There is some confusion regarding the software that may be included in milestone build...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508554)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508554)**
## Description
There is some confusion regarding the software that may be included in milestone builds. We should include some guidance in the handbook.
Essentially, everything that goes into a build is subject to the IP Due Diligence Process. For those bits that are reviewed by the IP Team (via CQs), #checkin approval is required before something can be included in a nightly/integration/milestone/etc build. Full approval is required before the something can be included in a release.
Builds are discussed sporadically in the document. Perhaps we can grow the "Builds" section.
### Blocking
* [Bug 499707](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=499707)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/48Provide guidance for including vendor/company-specific links2021-09-24T20:25:42ZEclipse WebmasterProvide guidance for including vendor/company-specific links## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508546)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508546)**
## Description
Some project websites provide links to specific company websites (e.g. links to "profe...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508546)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508546)**
## Description
Some project websites provide links to specific company websites (e.g. links to "professional services"). These websites need to follow rules regarding level playing fields and vendor neutrality. We should provide some advice for getting this right.https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/47FIx the grammar in statement regarding trademarks and ownership.2020-11-25T19:34:24ZEclipse WebmasterFIx the grammar in statement regarding trademarks and ownership.## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508475)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508475)**
## Description
The grammar is incorrect in this sentence:
--
This prevents companies from misusing o...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508475)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508475)**
## Description
The grammar is incorrect in this sentence:
--
This prevents companies from misusing or misrepresenting their products as being the projects.
--
The wording is a bit awkward and should probably be changed.https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/46Expand the section on creating/managing a project website2021-08-19T20:02:58ZEclipse WebmasterExpand the section on creating/managing a project website## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508465)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508465)**
## Description
We should include some discussion of the URL, the relationship between the Git reposit...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508465)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508465)**
## Description
We should include some discussion of the URL, the relationship between the Git repository and the website (e.g. how frequently one is pushed to the other), services provided, etc.
Random thoughts:
* The default implementation redirects to the project's PMI page.
* You need to be a committer to edit website content.
* Consider asking the webmaster to add your website Git repository to Gerrit.
* Contributions to the website can be considered as part of the merit for becoming a committer (it's really up to the project team).https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/45Update the IP Due Diligence Process Poster to take IP Due Diligence type into...2020-11-25T19:34:20ZEclipse WebmasterUpdate the IP Due Diligence Process Poster to take IP Due Diligence type into consideration## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
Assigned to **Sharon Corbett `@scorbett`**
**[Link to original bug (#508207)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508207)**
## Description
The poster requires some updates to accom...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
Assigned to **Sharon Corbett `@scorbett`**
**[Link to original bug (#508207)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508207)**
## Description
The poster requires some updates to accommodate Type A/B Due Diligience.
This might be a good opportunity to revisit the technology that we use to generate the document. e.g. can we do a decent job of Graphviz?
We may also consider moving the document into the Handbook.
AFAIK, modifications to this document do not require approval from the IP Advisory Committee or the Board of Directors.
### Blocking
* [Bug 496959](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=496959)
* [Bug 499707](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=499707)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/44Replace discussion of "works-with" dependencies need with regular approval me...2020-11-25T19:34:12ZEclipse WebmasterReplace discussion of "works-with" dependencies need with regular approval mechanism## Submitted by Gunnar Wagenknecht `@gunnar`
**[Link to original bug (#508160)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508160)**
## Description
Currently, a top-level PMC reviews and approves CQ filed by its projects. Approva...## Submitted by Gunnar Wagenknecht `@gunnar`
**[Link to original bug (#508160)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508160)**
## Description
Currently, a top-level PMC reviews and approves CQ filed by its projects. Approval happens via +1 in IPzilla
For "works-with" dependencies, this approval is not sufficient. For works-with dependencies, a PMC has to:
a) +1 on the mailing list
b) add mailing list link to IPzilla
c) +1 on IPzilla
I'd like to see a-b go. It adds unnecessary steps to the process which causes issues with projects - mostly in the form of delays.
### Depends on
* [Bug 508195](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508195)
### Blocking
* [Bug 508206](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508206)
* [Bug 509307](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=509307)
* [Bug 529388](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=529388)
* [Bug 514657](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=514657)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/43Provide branding guidance for Eclipse Marketplace entries2020-11-25T19:34:10ZEclipse WebmasterProvide branding guidance for Eclipse Marketplace entries## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508078)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508078)**
## Description
Project-produced Marketplace entries should follow certain rules and conventions.
As ...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#508078)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508078)**
## Description
Project-produced Marketplace entries should follow certain rules and conventions.
As a general rule, project names should be avoided unless they are actually meaningful to the intended audience ("C/C++ Development Tools" is better than "CDT"; though that may be a bad example as CDT is pretty well known to the community).
The organization/provider must be "The Eclipse Foundation".
What else?
The existing link in the phrase "The Eclipse Foundation strongly encourages all projects to create an maintain and Eclipse Marketplace presence." should point to the new content.https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/42Add discussion on the relationship between GitHub releases and EDP releases t...2020-11-25T19:34:08ZEclipse WebmasterAdd discussion on the relationship between GitHub releases and EDP releases to the handbook## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#506836)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=506836)**
## Description
An excerpt from a recent email that I sent:
--
We've avoided adding any significance ...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#506836)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=506836)**
## Description
An excerpt from a recent email that I sent:
--
We've avoided adding any significance (as far as the Eclipse Development Process is concerned) to GitHub "releases". Though, I am concerned that there is ample opportunity for confusion between the GitHub notion and the more formal notion that we engage in. If you do choose to use GitHub releases as a concept separate from the EDP, I'd prefer that you use names that are suggestive of milestones (e.g. 1.0M1 is a milestone build for a pending more formal 1.0 release).
--
### Blocking
* [Bug 485964](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=485964)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/41Add an appendix specifically concerned with issues related to extending the E...2020-11-25T19:34:07ZEclipse WebmasterAdd an appendix specifically concerned with issues related to extending the Eclipse Platform## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#505925)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=505925)**
## Description
I think that it would be a handy addition to the Eclipse Project Handbook (and perhaps...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#505925)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=505925)**
## Description
I think that it would be a handy addition to the Eclipse Project Handbook (and perhaps the PolarSys variant) with helpful hints for building Eclipse Plug-ins, etc.
e.g.
* notice file requirements;
* recommendations for logging, preferences, namespaces, etc.
* use of Package-Import vs. Bundle-Require
Much of this information is already in the wiki.
### Depends on
* [Bug 505924](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=505924)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/40Add a branding checklist to the handbook2020-11-25T19:34:02ZEclipse WebmasterAdd a branding checklist to the handbook## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#505741)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=505741)**
## Description
e.g.
- Project web site must be hosted at eclipse.org
- First reference to project na...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#505741)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=505741)**
## Description
e.g.
- Project web site must be hosted at eclipse.org
- First reference to project name needs to be Eclipse `<project name>`
- Project web site needs to include the standard Eclipse footer
### Blocking
* [Bug 485704](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=485704)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/39Update "CLA" references to "ECA" in the handbook2020-11-25T19:34:00ZEclipse WebmasterUpdate "CLA" references to "ECA" in the handbook## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#501008)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=501008)**
## Description
With the roll out of the new ECA, we should update references in the handbook.
### B...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#501008)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=501008)**
## Description
With the roll out of the new ECA, we should update references in the handbook.
### Blocking
* [Bug 502291](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=502291)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/38Provide some guidance on granularity of CQs2021-03-24T20:56:28ZEclipse WebmasterProvide some guidance on granularity of CQs## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#500460)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=500460)**
## Description
There is some confusion in the committer community regarding the expected granularity ...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#500460)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=500460)**
## Description
There is some confusion in the committer community regarding the expected granularity for CQs. The IP Policy refers to "Content", but does not (AFAICT) suggest any particular level of granularity.
My understanding is that from the IP team's perspective, the desired granularity is the "library". That the library may manifest has multiple files is not relevant from an IP Due Diligence point of view.
For example, CQs 11879, 11880, 11881, 11882, 11883, 11884, 11885, 11886, 11887, 11888, 11889, 11890, 11891, and 11892 represent AngularJS 1.57 in (I believe) its entirely. All of these CQs point to the same "source URL". In fact, the committer created an "umbrella CQ" for these [1].
My understanding is that one CQ for AngularJS would suffice. That the library may be distributed as multiple individual .js files is irrelevant. Further, it would save both the committer and IP Team time (perhaps just a few minutes for each, but that adds up).
I've seen examples of this with Java libraries as well. One first possible example that I see is the combination of CQs 105 and 106 which represent the Xerces API and Implementation respectively. I believe that these two CQs represent just one library that happens to be distributed as two separate JAR files.
Another example is the difference in the way that Batik 1.6 and 1.7 are represented: there is a single CQ for version 1.6 and multiple CQs for each of the various parts that make up Batik 1.7.
Can we provide a simple definition of a library? e.g.
* All source comes from the same team/repository
* Provides some coherent bit of functionality
* May include separate but interdependent modules
* May manifest in deployment as multiple files
The actual definition is probably fuzzy, so the best that we can likely come up with is some guidance that saves everybody some time.
This probably belongs in the handbook. Maybe we can move it there once we have an answer.
[1] https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11804
### Blocking
* [Bug 496959](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=496959)
* [Bug 508206](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=508206)https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipse/technology/dash/org.eclipse.dash.handbook/-/issues/37Include discussion of PMC's role in proposal process2020-11-25T19:33:53ZEclipse WebmasterInclude discussion of PMC's role in proposal process## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#500451)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=500451)**
## Description
The PMC gets a say in what projects fall under its umbrella. Some projects (e.g. Techn...## Submitted by Wayne Beaton `@wbeaton`
**[Link to original bug (#500451)](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=500451)**
## Description
The PMC gets a say in what projects fall under its umbrella. Some projects (e.g. Technology) don't care, but others--especially those that take an active role in the process (e.g. Eclipse, IoT)--certainly do. For these projects, we consult with the PMC before posting a proposal. But this part of the process is not formally described.
The main challenge is that there are often constraints regarding when project proposals can be made public (to coordinate, for example, with a press release) and the only means that we have to communicate with a PMC as a whole is via a public channel. In those cases where we can't publicly disclose a proposal, we tend to work through back channels.
One thing that we might consider is getting a new project team to connect with the PMC before going public with the proposal. The primary challenge here is the same: how do you do this without publicly disclosing the proposal before the team is ready? Perhaps we can invite project teams to either connect via the PMC's mailing list or just join one of the team calls.
I'm working on an assumption that PMC leads don't want us to make their email addresses any more easily accessible.
### Blocking
* [Bug 529388](https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=529388)