[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Hello PMC,
apparently I have been missing some key information about CQs that are
needed for Paho. I had been working on the assumption that if we
didn't use a library within the Eclipse infrastructure, nor distribute
it, that a CQ was not needed. I have now found and reviewed the document:
https://eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_Policy_and_Procedure_for_3rd_Party_Dependencies_Final.pdf
and have some questions about it and the relationship to Paho.
1) Is there a list of exempt prerequisites somewhere, or is that
determination made on a per project basis? Was that part of the initial
IP review for individual components (Python and .Net clients for
example)? We have no separate CQ for the Python interpreter, .Net
runtime or standard Linux libraries amongst others.
2) The embedded client for Paho has code to use network and timer
libraries for Linux, TI cc3200, ARM mbed, Arduino and FreeRTOS so far.
To work on a particular operating system, those calls have to be used,
although using Linux is an alternative. These seem to fall into the
category of a) ii), works-with dependencies: a choice of implementations
is available, but at least one is a prerequisite (which could be
Linux). What does the PMC think?
3) For each of these OS platforms, the embedded client also uses
standard C library functions like memcpy(). These are provided by the
OS or platform. Do I need to submit a CQ for the whole OS/standard
library for each platform?
4) Is the compiler used in each case also a dependency? (Whether or not
it is used in the Eclipse build infrastructure, or to build binaries
which are distributed).
5) For each works-with dependency, do we need a separate CQ for every
possible version of the dependency? That seems impractical; if not, is
there some principle we use?
Thanks
--
Ian Craggs
icraggs@xxxxxxxxxx IBM United Kingdom
Paho Project Lead; Committer on Mosquitto
