+1
I understand that this is just bookkeeping, since we’ve actually been running against XULRunner for long.
Or will we have to do a new Workswith for every new XULRunner version to be supported ?
Thanks,
Martin
--
Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Architect – Development Tools,
Wind River
direct +43.662.457915.85 fax +43.662.457915.6
From: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of John Arthorne
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 5:44 PM
To: eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eclipse-pmc] Please approve works-with dependency on XULRunner 17
PMC members,
The SWT team has submitted a CQ to document a dependency on XUL Runner 17. This is not a library we would distribute with Eclipse Platform or SWT. If the library is present, then SWT can optionally
use the library in its Browser widget. As required by the Eclipse 3rd party library policy [2], the PMC must determine what kind of dependency this is, and record its decision in a public communication channel. I propose we record this as a "works-with" dependency.
This exact case is in fact used as an example in the definition of "Works with" in the policy document. Please cast your vote here.
+1 from me
[1] https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7434
[2] http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_Policy_and_Procedure_for_3rd_Party_Dependencies_Final.pdf
