Irene Huang wrote: > Darren > > Do you mean that you we have to sign one contract for each of the > project even if the projects belongs to one manager, and the all the > projects consume the same interfaces?
Yes because while the projects currently belong to the manager organisational structures change. The ARC process only tracks projects not management structure. > I don't think that makes sense. It does if you look at it from an ARC view. ARC is all about projects. Regardless of wither or not you think it makes sense that is how it currently works and changing it requires a change of ARC policy that you can not do in this case. > The function of contracts is to make sure that the consumers of a > specific interface know that when the changes of the interfaces may > affect them. And I do think that one contract for one manager would do > that. Only given the current organisational structure. Let me give you an example. SSH uses OpenSSL for libcrypto. Originally SSH had a private copy of libcrypto, then I made OpenSSL publically visible, same engineer same manager but still we signed contracts. Later SSH and OpenSSL became owned by different managers, then later again the same manager (but a different one than the original). Things change. The current ARC process requires that contracts be signed even in the case that the supplying and consuming manager are currently the same person if the projects are different. -- Darren J Moffat
