Darren Thanks for the explanation. We will sign different contracts for different projects.
thanks --Irene On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 11:18 +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote: > 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. >
