Re: [cosmos-dev] Some code that should have been archived?

[David Whiteman <david_whiteman@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Removed completely from CVS, or just archived?  We have a lot of code in 
an archive folder that likely does not comply with our IP approvals.  So 
I think we have 2 options here:

* Move the two ME projects to the Archive folder
* Delete the two ME projects and the entire Archive folder from CVS 
(they can still be recovered if necessary, right?)

David

Ruth Lee wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> If 3rd party code is in our CVS, that is a form of redistribution and 
> we must have Eclipse Legal approval for it. If we do not have legal 
> approval for it, the 3rd party code must be removed from our CVS.
>
> If this is COSMOS code that references 3rd party code, we would still 
> have a CQ open for it, I would think? Are any of our obsolete CQs 
> requesting permission for WSDM? http://www.eclipse.org/cosmos/legal Or 
> is this something that fell through the cracks?
>
> Thanks,
> Ruth.
>
>
> Ruth Lee
> IBM Toronto Lab
> ruthdaly@xxxxxxxxxx
> T/L 313-4453
>
>
> *David Whiteman <gopack91@xxxxxxxxx>*
> Sent by: cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 10/30/2008 05:56 PM
> Please respond to
> Cosmos Dev <cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> 	
> To
> 	Cosmos Dev <cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	Re: [cosmos-dev] Some code that should have been archived?
>
>
>
> 	
>
>
>
>
>
> Ruth Lee wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > It looks like some WSDM code is still in COSMOS 1.0 but I believe that
> > it should have been archived? Can we archive these two plug-ins or are
> > they active? If they need to remain active then I need someone to
> > check the code to see if it has any 3rd party code to find out if our
> > IP log needs to be corrected and resubmitted to Eclipse Legal for
> > re-approval.
> >
> > Plugins:
> > org.eclipse.cosmos.me.management.common
> > org.eclipse.cosmos.me.management.wsdm
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ruth.
> What I know... these are not active in that they are not included in any
> of our downloads, nor are they referenced by any of our 1.0 CMDBf
> functionality.  Also, as the name suggests by the 2nd plugin/project,
> there is code that references WSDM there.  The question is whether it's
> enough that this code is not in our download zips, or if the presence of
> it in our repository outside of the Archive tree constitutes a violation
> of prereq approval.
>
> David
> _______________________________________________
> cosmos-dev mailing list
> cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmos-dev