Re: [orbit-dev] Interested in Contributing LPG v1.1

[Christian Damus <cdamus@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Jeff,


> 
> Hey Christian, 
> 
> You do NOT have to run this through the IP process again to 
> contribute it to Orbit.  We will likely have to do the standard
> "manual" tracing for some time. 

Thanks for the assurance.  I saw my answer on
orbit-dev not long after
I asked! (on a different thread)


> As for naming, I agree that the simple package name they have used
> does not seem like a good bundle name.  In similar cases with
which 
> I am familiar people have gone with the project name (e.g., net.
> sourceforge...).  As for using "orbit" names, to date
that has not 
> been our approach.  In a sense we are encroaching on people's
> namespace but only to the degree that they are not occupying it.  If
> they were to start shipping this lib as a bundle and wanting to call
> it net.sourceforge.lpg, we would happily adopt their bundling of the
> lib.  An alternate viewpoint on using eclipse names is that we
would
> be taking credit for the work as ours and introducing ambiguity 
> around the content (e.g., did Eclipse change it somehow or is it the
> real thing from the originator?). 

Yes, that's a very good point.  I'm convinced!


> So if I am understanding your message correctly, you are offering
to
> contribute the bundling of lpg and to continuing maintenance and 
> updating of that library right?

Yes, I am offering to contribute version 1.1 of LPG
and any other
versions that some Eclipse project may need, when
that need should
arise.

How do we review the structure of contributions with
the other
committers?  I am assuming that I would submit
a bug on Orbit, accept
it, and attach some kind of patch for y'all to review
before I commit
anything.

Also, is there an Orbit in-box ID in bugzilla that
I should listen to?

Thanks,

Christian

<snip>