| Re: [incubation] Policy: Access rights to GitHub Wiki |
Hi everyone, to piggyback on this discussion, depending on the documentation system used it may be impossible to include a copyright header in the documentation files. Is that a problem in any way? Cheers, Chris On 12/07/17 13:08, Oliver Kopp wrote: > Dear Wayne, > > Thank you for clarification. > > For the interested readers, the upcoming EPL 2.0 (see > https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/epl-discuss/msg00155.html > <https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/epl-discuss/msg00155.html>) also > covers "documentation source". > > OK, then I'll move forward to collect the whole Winery documentation at > https://github.com/eclipse/winery/tree/master/docs > <https://github.com/eclipse/winery/tree/master/docs>. > > > In my current case, I asked a student to convert my Word document to > Markdown. So, the content is by me, but the rendering in Markdown (thus, > the source itself) is by the student. I just double checked the CQ > https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13783 > <https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13783> and > https://github.com/eclipse/winery/pull/65/files > <https://github.com/eclipse/winery/pull/65/files>. This contribution is > less than 1000 lines and the ECA is correctly in place. So, I will > remove the otherwise copyrighted logo (issue raised by Sharon in CQ > 13783) and merge right away. > > In other words: In the concrete case, I was confused about the line > limit (250 [1] vs. 500 vs. 1000 lines [2]). Now, I am at the > less-than-1000-LOC case. > > Thank you for the quick and helpful answer! > > > Cheers, > > Oliver > > [1] Eclipse Foundation Inc., Due Diligence Process, v. 4.8, January, 2012 > [2] Eclipse Foundation Inc., Due Diligence Process, v. 5.2, March, 2017 > > > 2017-07-12 6:06 GMT+02:00 Wayne Beaton > <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>: > > Documentation is intellectual property that may be included in > downstream products just as easily as actual code, so steps need to > be take to mitigate the risks associated with that adoption. > > The Eclipse IP Due Diligence Process primarily a matter of > intellectual property risk mitigation. The Eclipse IP Policy > understands risk in intellectual property and exists to do that work > on behalf of our project teams. While I appreciate that you don't > want to overwhelm them with additional work, the fact remains that > leveraging their expertise in intellectual property management is a > critical part of the process. > > So... you really need to follow the IP Policy and process regardless > of how the documentation is actually represented. Are you expecting > many significant contributions (e.g. more than 1000 lines)? I > suspect that for most contributions, you'll just need to track the > contribution and not necessarily engage the IP Team. > > FWIW, it's true that the use of the Eclipsepedia Wiki for > documentation represents a bit of a grey area. Contributions there > are covered by the website terms of use. Strictly speaking, however, > if a project harvests wiki-based information to produce official > documentation, the IP Policy applies. > > HTH, > > Wayne > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Oliver Kopp <kopp.dev@xxxxxxxxx > <mailto:kopp.dev@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > Hi, > > With the Eclipse Winery project (part of SOA), I am developing > at GitHub and want to provide ease editing of docs. Thus, I'm > going for markdown. > > First, I thought, that github-pages are a good idea, because > > (i) they support markdown out of the box and > (ii) they are nicely rendered. See > http://eclipse.github.io/winery/ <http://eclipse.github.io/winery/> > (iii) the documentation comes along with the code and can be > updated along with a commit. > (iv) Possibility to use GitHub's pull request review system to > ensure quality of the updates. > > In case, however, a contributor wants to add text to > github-pages, the IP process has to be kicked off: The > documentation relies inside the "doc" folder of the source code > repository. This causes load on the EMO IP team, which I'd like > to reduce and not to increase. Thus, I decided for using the > GitHub wiki page (i.e., https://github.com/eclipse/winery/wiki > <https://github.com/eclipse/winery/wiki> in the context of > winery). See also > https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13783 > <https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13783> > > I accept that the Wiki is not rendered that nicely (point ii), > that the documentation is not at the same place as the code > (point iii) and that I cannot use GitHub's pull request review > system (point iv). > > Since contributors are not allowed to edit the Wiki directly, > the approach to get content in is via "git magic": The > contributor clones the wiki locally, does the edits and pushes > the changes to a git repository X. I fetch from X, review the > changes and push the changes to the Eclipse. > > Is this workflow intended? Acceptable? What do other projects do > for their documentation. What is best practice? > > When seeing https://eclipse.org/che/, I think, I should generate > a GitHub repository "winery-homepage", which uses Jekyll to > generate the HTML files and then "push" the generated HTMLs to > the Eclipse infrastructure. So, I could take the advantages of > (i), (ii) and (iv). > > WDYT? > > Cheers, > > Oliver > > _______________________________________________ > incubation mailing list > incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or > unsubscribe from this list, visit > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation > <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation> > > > > > -- > Wayne Beaton > Director of Open Source Projects > The Eclipse Foundation > > _______________________________________________ > incubation mailing list > incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or > unsubscribe from this list, visit > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation > <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > incubation mailing list > incubation@xxxxxxxxxxx > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature