Do we have any update in this topic? Have the patches been submitted to Eclipse tinydtls repository?
On 03/16/2016 06:56 PM, Craig Pratt wrote: > Yeah - I get it. No worries here guys. We have the history for > "archeological" purposes. > > Either way, it's a lot of diff/patch munging. > > "The Dude abides"... > > cp > > On 3/16/16 2:29 PM, Benjamin Cab? wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Thiago Macieira >> <thiago.macieira at intel.com> wrote: >> >> There's a way around the cut. I don't know why they did it like >> that (Carsten, >> do you know?), but there's a mechanism in Git to get past this >> history >> restart. >> >> >> The reason is pretty simple, when we take new code we analyze its >> provenance and check it complies with our IP policy. If a project >> like tinydtls comes and plans on being dual-licensed EPL/EDL, we >> check that the tinydtls code is indeed 100% original, that the >> contributors to the codebase have CLAs in place (and that they agree >> to relicense their code, where required). We also check the >> provenance of 3rd party libraries the project depends on. E.g if >> there is a dependency towards a GPL library for the project to >> function properly, that's an obvious no-no. Same if a 3rd party >> library claims it's say EPL but our code scanners tells us otherwise >> (e.g they have "borrowed" pieces of GPL code). >> >> Long story short: in order to perform this analysis, the only >> reasonable approach is to do it for a snapshot of the codebase, >> typically HEAD. We can't go through years of history to check that at >> any point in time the project has indeed been EPL/EDL compatible >> *and* completely clean from an IP point of view. >> >> I hope this makes things a bit clearer :) >> I know it's somewhat "sad" to lose the SCM history, but experience >> shows that after a few months, there are very few cases where digging >> up the history really is necessary. I guess the main case being for >> people like you with unmerged patches in a now obsolete/orphan (or >> rather siblingless, kinda) branch. I think the git format-patch / git >> am should work just fine though as IIRC the patches weren't that big. >> >> Benjamin . >> --- >> Benjamin Cab? ? IoT Evangelist >> >> Eclipse Foundation >> +33 (0) 619196101 >> @kartben > > > -- > > craig pratt > > Caspia Consulting > > craig at ecaspia.com > > 503.746.8008 > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > iotivity-dev mailing list > iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org > https://lists.iotivity.org/mailman/listinfo/iotivity-dev -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20160415/1dbf97c2/attachment.html>
