Community
Participate
Working Groups
As stated on https://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/Contributing_via_Git#Contributing_a_patch (and confirmed to me in private email communication by Wayne), in order to consume a contribution via Bugzilla, the following has to hold: "You must have a signed CLA on file. Further, you need to sign-off on the Certificate of Origin in a comment on the bug. For example: This contribution complies with http://www.eclipse.org/legal/CoO.php" I can understand the sign-off is needed if a contribution is provided via Git/Gerrit. But why is this additional step needed when contributing via Bugzilla, if the contributor already has signed the CLA? The CLA FAQ (https://www.eclipse.org/legal/clafaq.php) state that the CLA was introduced to make things easier. Now, I have to required a respective CoO compliance statement (as before) and a signed CLA in addition (which was not required before). That seems to be more work, not less. If the CLA does not cover the CoO compliance already (which I do not understand so, because the texts seem to be equivalent) why does it not already contain a reference to the CoO?
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant. -- The automated Eclipse Genie.
I think that rolling the CLA and CoA into a single ECA has fixed this. https://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/Contributing_via_Git#via_Bugzilla Correct me if I'm wrong.
