Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | [proposal] technology.flux | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Community | Reporter: | Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton> |
| Component: | Proposals and Reviews | Assignee: | Eclipse Management Organization <emo> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | aclement, john.arthorne, mike.milinkovich, mkoegel, mlippert, sharon.corbett, webmaster |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| URL: | https://projects.eclipse.org/proposals/flight | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Bug Depends on: | 427938 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
|
Description
Wayne Beaton
I've created a forum topic. Please monitor this channel for questions. http://www.eclipse.org/forums/index.php/m/1240071/#msg_1240071 Note that comments may also appear on the proposal document itself. I've got two mentors. I have not yet received approval of the project name trademark. I need this approval before we can move to the next step (creation review). The next review period ends on March 5. Anything I can do to move forward at the moment? Unfortunately, we will not be able to use the Flight name. Martin is working finding a new name. I've initiated a trademark review for the suggested new name, Flux. I've changed the name of the project to Flux in the proposal in anticipation of good news from the trademark review. I've preserved the original URL. These two work now: http://projects.eclipse.org/proposals/flight http://projects.eclipse.org/proposals/flux The IP Team has approved the trademark! I declare this creation review successful. Congratulations on your successful Creation Review! Please perform these next steps: * Fill out the new project provisioning request (NPPR) [1]. Note that the form must reflect your creation document: specifically, the committer list should match. * Let your new committers know that they won't be able to fill our their committer questionnaires until *after* the NPPR has been submitted and they have received their automated email titled "New Committer Request Form." * If you have not already started, now is good time to start assembling your initial contribution [2]; note that code cannot be pushed to the project's source code repository until after the IP team has approved the initial contribution. * Please familiarize yourself with the IP Due Diligence Process [3] and the Parallel IP Process [4]. * A "project information" page [5] has been created that you can use to share information about the project with the community. As your committers are provisioned, they will be able to edit the information on this page. Your project mentors are an excellent resource if you need guidance, and we urge you to make use of their expertise. Thanks, and let me know if you have any questions. [1] http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project_provisioning_request.php?id=technology.flux [2] http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/Initial_Contribution [3] http://www.eclipse.org/legal/EclipseLegalProcessPoster.pdf [4] http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/parallel-ip-process.php [5] https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/technology.flux I have prepared the initial code contribution. Where should I attach the ZIP to? Is this the right entry or should I create a new bugzilla entry for that? (In reply to Martin Lippert from comment #10) > I have prepared the initial code contribution. Where should I attach the ZIP > to? Is this the right entry or should I create a new bugzilla entry for that? AFAIK, the usual path is to create a CQ in IPzilla and attach the initial code contribution there. submitted the initial code contribution via: https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8214 Can this be marked resolved? (In reply to John Arthorne from comment #13) > Can this be marked resolved? Nope. Not yet. We keep these open until after the initial contribution has been approved and we verify check in. For completeness, we use these bugs to make sure that new projects don't get stuck in our "onboarding" process (i.e. we use these bugs to make sure that it stays on my radar). Given your involvement, John, I'm not specifically worried about Flux, but do still want to keep this bug open. Can this be marked resolved? (In reply to John Arthorne from comment #15) > Can this be marked resolved? Yup. |