On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 5:56 AM, Eike Stepper <[email protected]> wrote:
> Am 14.03.2016 um 22:16 schrieb David Smiley: > >> It's truly up to the Eclipse's IP Team, >> > IIRC., it wasn't Legal who wanted those +1's, it was the PMCs who wanted > to stay up to date with what their projects are going to use. That's right, the PMC +1 was never intended as a legal review. It was intended as a check on the technical merits of the 3rd party library. For example is another similar library already in use, or an alternative approach possible that doesn't use the library. Does the library have a healthy community with consistent releases and responsive developers, etc. The PMC also determines the relationship of the library to the project - a hard dependency vs works-with dependency, etc. Maybe it varies across top level projects whether the PMC is actually in a position to know or care about this, and in some cases the sub-project lead is in a better position to figure this out (although I would argue in this case the sub-project lead should be on the PMC). John
_______________________________________________ incubation mailing list [email protected] To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation
