|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | p { margin-bottom:10px; } blockquote { margin-left:2em; margin-right:	  |	 p { margin-bottom:10px; } blockquote { margin-left:2em; margin-right: | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | Eclipse Development Process							Eclipse Development Process | 
|  |  | 
|  | Contents									Contents | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | 1 Purpose									1 Purpose | 
|  | 2 Principles									2 Principles | 
|  |  | 
|  | 2.1 Open Source									2.1 Open Source | 
|  | Rules of Engagement								Rules of Engagement | 
|  | 2.2 Eclipse Ecosystem								2.2 Eclipse Ecosystem | 
|  | 2.3 Three Communities								2.3 Three Communities | 
|  | 2.4 Clear, Concise, and								2.4 Clear, Concise, and | 
|  | Evolving									Evolving | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | 3 Requirements									3 Requirements | 
|  |  | 
|  | 3.1 Requirements and								3.1 Requirements and | 
|  | Guidelines									Guidelines | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | 4 Project Structure and								4 Project Structure and | 
|  | Organization									Organization | 
|  |  | 
|  | 4.1 Committers									4.1 Committers | 
|  | 4.2 Code and Releases								4.2 Code and Releases | 
|  | 4.3 IP Records									4.3 IP Records | 
|  | 4.4 Community Awareness								4.4 Community Awareness | 
|  | 4.5 Scope									4.5 Scope | 
|  | 4.6 Leaders									4.6 Leaders | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	4.6.1 Project Management Committee | 
|  | >	(PMC) | 
|  | >	4.6.2 Project Lead(s) | 
|  | > | 
|  | > | 
|  | 4.7 Committers and								4.7 Committers and | 
|  | Contributors									Contributors | 
|  | 4.8 Councils									4.8 Councils | 
|  | 4.9 Incubator Projects								4.9 Incubator Projects | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | 5 Roadmap Process								5 Roadmap Process | 
|  | 6 Development Process								6 Development Process | 
|  |  | 
|  | 6.1 Mentors									6.1 Mentors | 
|  | 6.2 Project Lifecycle								6.2 Project Lifecycle | 
|  | 6.2.1 Pre-proposal								6.2.1 Pre-proposal | 
|  | 6.2.2 Proposal									6.2.2 Proposal | 
|  | 6.2.3 Incubation								6.2.3 Incubation | 
|  | 6.2.4 Mature									6.2.4 Mature | 
|  | 6.2.5 Top-Level									6.2.5 Top-Level | 
|  | 6.2.6 Archived									6.2.6 Archived | 
|  | 6.3 Reviews									6.3 Reviews | 
|  |  | 
|  | 6.3.1 Creation Review								6.3.1 Creation Review | 
|  | 6.3.2 Graduation Review								6.3.2 Graduation Review | 
|  | 6.3.3 Release Review								6.3.3 Release Review | 
|  | 6.3.4 Promotion Review								6.3.4 Promotion Review | 
|  | 6.3.5 Continuation								6.3.5 Continuation | 
|  | Review										Review | 
|  | 6.3.6 Termination								6.3.6 Termination | 
|  | Review										Review | 
|  | 6.3.7 Move Review								6.3.7 Move Review | 
|  | 6.3.8 Restructuring								6.3.8 Restructuring | 
|  | Review										Review | 
|  | 6.3.9 Combining Reviews								6.3.9 Combining Reviews | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | 6.4 Releases									6.4 Releases | 
|  | 6.5 Grievance Handling								6.5 Grievance Handling | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | 7 Precedence									7 Precedence | 
|  | 8 Revisions									8 Revisions | 
|  |  | 
|  | 8.1 Revision 2.4								8.1 Revision 2.4 | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | 1. Purpose									1. Purpose | 
|  | This document describes the Development Process for the Eclipse			This document describes the Development Process for the Eclipse | 
|  | Foundation. In particular, it describes how the Membership at Large,		Foundation. In particular, it describes how the Membership at Large, | 
|  | the Board of Directors, other constituents of the Ecosystem, and the		the Board of Directors, other constituents of the Ecosystem, and the | 
|  | Eclipse Management Organization (EMO) lead, influence, and collaborate		Eclipse Management Organization (EMO) lead, influence, and collaborate | 
|  | with Eclipse Projects to achieve these Eclipse purposes:			with Eclipse Projects to achieve these Eclipse purposes: | 
|  | The Eclipse technology is a vendor-neutral, open				The Eclipse technology is a vendor-neutral, open | 
|  | development platform supplying frameworks and exemplary, extensible		development platform supplying frameworks and exemplary, extensible | 
|  | tools (the 'Eclipse Platform'). Eclipse Platform tools are exemplary i		tools (the 'Eclipse Platform'). Eclipse Platform tools are exemplary i | 
|  | that they verify the utility of the Eclipse frameworks, illustrate the		that they verify the utility of the Eclipse frameworks, illustrate the | 
|  | appropriate use of those frameworks, and support the development and		appropriate use of those frameworks, and support the development and | 
|  | maintenance of the Eclipse Platform itself; Eclipse Platform tools are		maintenance of the Eclipse Platform itself; Eclipse Platform tools are | 
|  | extensible in that their functionality is accessible via documented		extensible in that their functionality is accessible via documented | 
|  | programmatic interfaces. The purpose of Eclipse Foundation Inc., is to		programmatic interfaces. The purpose of Eclipse Foundation Inc., is to | 
|  | advance the creation, evolution, promotion, and support of the Eclipse		advance the creation, evolution, promotion, and support of the Eclipse | 
|  | Platform and to cultivate both an open source community and an			Platform and to cultivate both an open source community and an | 
|  | ecosystem of complementary products, capabilities, and				ecosystem of complementary products, capabilities, and | 
|  | services.									services. | 
|  |  | 
|  | |	Explanatory comments, guidelines, and checklists - as well as | 
|  | |	additional requirements added by the EMO per <a href= | 
|  | Explanatory comments, guidelines, and checklists - as			  < | 
|  | well as additional requirements added by the EMO per <a href=		  < | 
|  | "#3_Requirements">section 3 - are noted in yellow boxes.			"#3_Requirements">section 3 - are noted in yellow boxes. | 
|  |  | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | This document has five sections:						This document has five sections: | 
|  |  | 
|  | Principles outlines the basic							Principles outlines the basic | 
|  | principles upon which the development process is based.				principles upon which the development process is based. | 
|  | Requirements describes the							Requirements describes the | 
|  | requirements that the Eclipse community has for its development			requirements that the Eclipse community has for its development | 
|  | process.									process. | 
|  | Structure and									Structure and | 
|  | Organization specifies the structure and organization of the			Organization specifies the structure and organization of the | 
|  | projects and project community at Eclipse.					projects and project community at Eclipse. | 
|  | Roadmap Process describes							Roadmap Process describes | 
|  | the manner by which the EMO will work with the projects to create the		the manner by which the EMO will work with the projects to create the | 
|  | annual Eclipse Roadmap.								annual Eclipse Roadmap. | 
|  | Development Process								Development Process | 
|  | outlines the lifecycle and processes required of all Eclipse			outlines the lifecycle and processes required of all Eclipse | 
|  | projects.									projects. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 2. Principles									2. Principles | 
|  | The following describe the guiding principles used in developing this	  |	The following describes the guiding principles used in developing | 
|  | Development Process.							  |	this Development Process. | 
|  | 2.1 Open Source									2.1 Open Source | 
|  | Rules of Engagement								Rules of Engagement | 
|  |  | 
|  | Open - Eclipse is open to all; Eclipse provides the same			Open - Eclipse is open to all; Eclipse provides the same | 
|  | opportunity to all. Everyone participates with the same rules; there		opportunity to all. Everyone participates with the same rules; there | 
|  | are no rules to exclude any potential contributors which include, of		are no rules to exclude any potential contributors which include, of | 
|  | course, direct competitors in the marketplace.					course, direct competitors in the marketplace. | 
|  | Transparent - Project discussions, minutes, deliberations,			Transparent - Project discussions, minutes, deliberations, | 
|  | project plans, plans for new features, and other artifacts are open,		project plans, plans for new features, and other artifacts are open, | 
|  | public, and easily accessible.							public, and easily accessible. | 
|  | Meritocracy - Eclipse is a meritocracy. The more you				Meritocracy - Eclipse is a meritocracy. The more you | 
|  | contribute the more responsibility you will earn. Leadership roles in		contribute the more responsibility you will earn. Leadership roles in | 
|  | Eclipse are also merit-based and earned by peer acclaim.			Eclipse are also merit-based and earned by peer acclaim. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 2.2 Eclipse Ecosystem								2.2 Eclipse Ecosystem | 
|  | Eclipse as a brand is the sum of its parts (all of the Projects), and	  |	Eclipse as a brand is the sum of its parts (all of the Projects), | 
|  | Projects should strive for the highest possible quality in extensible	  |	and Projects should strive for the highest possible quality in | 
|  | frameworks, exemplary tools, transparent processes, and project		  |	extensible frameworks, exemplary tools, transparent processes, and | 
|  | openness.								  |	project openness. | 
|  | The Eclipse Foundation has the responsibility to				The Eclipse Foundation has the responsibility to | 
|  | ...cultivate...an ecosystem of complementary products,				...cultivate...an ecosystem of complementary products, | 
|  | capabilities, and services.... It is therefore a key principle			capabilities, and services.... It is therefore a key principle | 
|  | that the Eclipse Development Process ensures that the projects are		that the Eclipse Development Process ensures that the projects are | 
|  | managed for the benefit of both the open source community and the		managed for the benefit of both the open source community and the | 
|  | ecosystem members. To this end, all Eclipse projects are required		ecosystem members. To this end, all Eclipse projects are required | 
|  | to:										to: | 
|  |  | 
|  | communicate their project plans and plans for new features (major		communicate their project plans and plans for new features (major | 
|  | and minor) in a timely, open and transparent manner;				and minor) in a timely, open and transparent manner; | 
|  | create platform quality frameworks capable of supporting the			create platform quality frameworks capable of supporting the | 
|  | building of commercial grade products on top of them;				building of commercial grade products on top of them; | 
|  | ship extensible, exemplary tools which help enable a broad			ship extensible, exemplary tools which help enable a broad | 
|  | community of users; and								community of users; and | 
|  | participate in the annual Roadmap process to ensure maximum			participate in the annual Roadmap process to ensure maximum | 
|  | transparency and bi-directional communication with the ecosystem.		transparency and bi-directional communication with the ecosystem. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 2.3 Three Communities								2.3 Three Communities | 
|  | Essential to the Purposes of the Eclipse Foundation is the development	  |	Essential to the Purposes of the Eclipse Foundation is the | 
|  | of three inter-related communities around each Project:			  |	development of three inter-related communities around each Project: | 
|  |  | 
|  | Contributors and Committers - a thriving, diverse and				Contributors and Committers - a thriving, diverse and | 
|  | active community of developers is the key component of any Eclipse		active community of developers is the key component of any Eclipse | 
|  | Project. Ideally, this community should be an open, transparent,		Project. Ideally, this community should be an open, transparent, | 
|  | inclusive, and diverse community of Committers and (non-Committer)		inclusive, and diverse community of Committers and (non-Committer) | 
|  | Contributors. Attracting new Contributors and Committers to an open		Contributors. Attracting new Contributors and Committers to an open | 
|  | source project is time consuming and requires active recruiting, not		source project is time consuming and requires active recruiting, not | 
|  | just passive "openness". The Project Leadership must make reasonable		just passive "openness". The Project Leadership must make reasonable | 
|  | efforts to encourage and nurture promising new Contributors.			efforts to encourage and nurture promising new Contributors. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Projects must have the diversity goals to ensure diversity of		  |	Projects must have diversity goals to ensure diversity of thought | 
|  | thought and avoiding relying on any one company or organization. At th	  |	and avoid relying on any one company or organization. At the same time | 
|  | same time, we acknowledge that enforcing a particular diversity metric	  |	we acknowledge that enforcing a particular diversity metric is a poor | 
|  | is a poor way to achieve these goals; rather we expect the project	  |	way to achieve these goals; rather we expect the project leadership to | 
|  | leadership to help the diversity evolve organically.			  |	help the diversity evolve organically. | 
|  | Diversity is a means to an end, not an end in itself, thus			Diversity is a means to an end, not an end in itself, thus | 
|  | diversity goals will differ by project based on the other			diversity goals will differ by project based on the other | 
|  | accomplishments of the project(s).						accomplishments of the project(s). | 
|  | Project are required to explain their diversity efforts and		  |	Projects are required to explain their diversity efforts and | 
|  | accomplishments during Reviews.							accomplishments during Reviews. | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | Users - an active and engaged user community is					Users - an active and engaged user community is | 
|  | proof-positive that the Project's exemplary tools are useful and		proof-positive that the Project's exemplary tools are useful and | 
|  | needed. Furthermore, a large user community is one of the key factors		needed. Furthermore, a large user community is one of the key factors | 
|  | in creating a viable ecosystem around an Eclipse project, thus			in creating a viable ecosystem around an Eclipse project, thus | 
|  | encouraging additional open source and commercial organizations to		encouraging additional open source and commercial organizations to | 
|  | participate. Like all good things, a user community takes time and		participate. Like all good things, a user community takes time and | 
|  | effort to bring to fruition, but once established is typically			effort to bring to fruition, but once established is typically | 
|  | self-sustaining.								self-sustaining. | 
|  | Adopters - an active and engaged adopter/plug-in developer			Adopters - an active and engaged adopter/plug-in developer | 
|  | community is the only way to prove that an Eclipse project is providin		community is the only way to prove that an Eclipse project is providin | 
|  | extensible frameworks and extensible tools accessible via documented		extensible frameworks and extensible tools accessible via documented | 
|  | APIs. Reuse of the frameworks within the companies that are			APIs. Reuse of the frameworks within the companies that are | 
|  | contributing to the project is necessary, but not sufficient to			contributing to the project is necessary, but not sufficient to | 
|  | demonstrate an adopter community. Again, creating, encouraging, and		demonstrate an adopter community. Again, creating, encouraging, and | 
|  | nurturing an adopter community outside of the Project's developers		nurturing an adopter community outside of the Project's developers | 
|  | takes time, energy, and creativity by the Project Leadership, but is		takes time, energy, and creativity by the Project Leadership, but is | 
|  | essential to the Project's long-term open source success.			essential to the Project's long-term open source success. | 
|  |  | 
|  | The Eclipse community considers the absence of any one or more of thes	  |	The Eclipse community considers the absence of any one or more of | 
|  | communities as proof that the Project is not sufficiently open,		  |	these communities as proof that the Project is not sufficiently open, | 
|  | transparent, and inviting, and/or that it has emphasized tools at the		transparent, and inviting, and/or that it has emphasized tools at the | 
|  | expense of extensible frameworks or vice versa.					expense of extensible frameworks or vice versa. | 
|  | 2.4 Clear, Concise,								2.4 Clear, Concise, | 
|  | and Evolving									and Evolving | 
|  | It is an explicit goal of the Development Process to be as clear and		It is an explicit goal of the Development Process to be as clear and | 
|  | concise as possible so as to help the Project teams navigate the		concise as possible so as to help the Project teams navigate the | 
|  | complexities, avoid the pitfalls, and become successful as quickly as		complexities, avoid the pitfalls, and become successful as quickly as | 
|  | possible.									possible. | 
|  | This document imposes requirements and constraints on the operation		This document imposes requirements and constraints on the operation | 
|  | of the Projects, and it does so on behalf of the larger Eclipse			of the Projects, and it does so on behalf of the larger Eclipse | 
|  | community. It is an explicit goal of the Development Process to provid		community. It is an explicit goal of the Development Process to provid | 
|  | as much freedom and autonomy to the Projects as possible while ensurin		as much freedom and autonomy to the Projects as possible while ensurin | 
|  | the collective qualities benefit the entire Eclipse community.			the collective qualities benefit the entire Eclipse community. | 
|  | Similarly, this document should not place undue constraints on the		Similarly, this document should not place undue constraints on the | 
|  | EMO or the Board that prevent them from governing the process as		EMO or the Board that prevent them from governing the process as | 
|  | necessary. We cannot foresee all circumstances and as such should be		necessary. We cannot foresee all circumstances and as such should be | 
|  | cautious of being overly prescriptive and/or requiring certain fixed		cautious of being overly prescriptive and/or requiring certain fixed | 
|  | metrics.									metrics. | 
|  | The frameworks, tools, projects, processes, community, and even the		The frameworks, tools, projects, processes, community, and even the | 
|  | definition of Quality continues to, and will continue to, evolve.		definition of Quality continues to, and will continue to, evolve. | 
|  | Creating rules or processes that force a static snapshot of any of		Creating rules or processes that force a static snapshot of any of | 
|  | these is detrimental to the health, growth, and ecosystem impact of		these is detrimental to the health, growth, and ecosystem impact of | 
|  | Eclipse.									Eclipse. | 
|  | Part of the strength of this document is in what it does not say,		Part of the strength of this document is in what it does not say, | 
|  | and thus opens for community definition through convention, guidelines		and thus opens for community definition through convention, guidelines | 
|  | and public consultation. A document with too much structure becomes to		and public consultation. A document with too much structure becomes to | 
|  | rigid and prevents the kind of innovation and change we desire for		rigid and prevents the kind of innovation and change we desire for | 
|  | Eclipse. In areas where this document is vague, we expect the Projects		Eclipse. In areas where this document is vague, we expect the Projects | 
|  | and Members to engage the community-at-large to clarify the current		and Members to engage the community-at-large to clarify the current | 
|  | norms and expectations.								norms and expectations. | 
|  | 3. Requirements									3. Requirements | 
|  | This document and any additional criteria as established by the EMO		This document and any additional criteria as established by the EMO | 
|  | contain requirements, recommendations, and suggestions.			  |	contains requirements, recommendations, and suggestions. | 
|  | <span style=									<span style= | 
|  | "margin-right:6px; margin-top:5px; float:left; color:ivory; background		"margin-right:6px; margin-top:5px; float:left; color:ivory; background | 
|  | RRequired - Certain responsibilities and behaviors are				RRequired - Certain responsibilities and behaviors are | 
|  | required of participants in Eclipse open source projects. Projects tha		required of participants in Eclipse open source projects. Projects tha | 
|  | fail to perform the required behaviors will be terminated by the EMO.		fail to perform the required behaviors will be terminated by the EMO. | 
|  | In keeping with the Guiding Principles, the number of requirements mus		In keeping with the Guiding Principles, the number of requirements mus | 
|  | be kept to an absolute minimum.							be kept to an absolute minimum. | 
|  | <span style=									<span style= | 
|  | "margin-right:6px; margin-top:5px; float:left; color:ivory; background		"margin-right:6px; margin-top:5px; float:left; color:ivory; background | 
|  | GGuideline - Other responsibilities and behaviors are				GGuideline - Other responsibilities and behaviors are | 
|  | recommended best practices. Collectively, we have learned that Project		recommended best practices. Collectively, we have learned that Project | 
|  | are more likely to be successful if the team members and leaders follo		are more likely to be successful if the team members and leaders follo | 
|  | these recommendations. Projects are strongly encouraged to follow thes		these recommendations. Projects are strongly encouraged to follow thes | 
|  | recommendations, but will not be penalized by this Process if they do		recommendations, but will not be penalized by this Process if they do | 
|  | not.										not. | 
|  | 3.1 Requirements and								3.1 Requirements and | 
|  | Guidelines									Guidelines | 
|  | This document is entirely composed of requirements. In addition to the	  |	This document is entirely composed of requirements. In addition to | 
|  | requirements specified in this Development Process, the EMO is		  |	the requirements specified in this Development Process, the EMO is | 
|  | instructed to clarify, expand, and extend this Process by creating a		instructed to clarify, expand, and extend this Process by creating a | 
|  | set of Eclipse Project Development Guidelines to advance the creation,		set of Eclipse Project Development Guidelines to advance the creation, | 
|  | evolution, promotion, and support of the Eclipse Platform and to		evolution, promotion, and support of the Eclipse Platform and to | 
|  | cultivate both an open source community and an ecosystem of			cultivate both an open source community and an ecosystem of | 
|  | complementary products and services.						complementary products and services. | 
|  | The EMO is not permitted to override or ignore the requirements			The EMO is not permitted to override or ignore the requirements | 
|  | listed in this document without the express written endorsement of the		listed in this document without the express written endorsement of the | 
|  | Board of Directors.								Board of Directors. | 
|  | 4. Structure and							  |	4. Project Structure and | 
|  | Organization									Organization | 
|  | The Eclipse Projects are organized hierarchically. The top of the	  | | 
|  | hierarchy are the set of Top Level Projects. Each Top Level		  |	This version of the document adds the word "Project" to the title of | 
|  | Project contains one or more Sub-Projects. Each Sub-Project		  |	this section to better qualify that it discusses the structure and | 
|  | contains zero or more Sub-Projects. The term Project refers to		  |	organization of projects. The <a href= | 
|  | either a Top-Level Project or a Sub-Project. Projects may be referred	  |	"#4_Structure_and_Organization">previous version of this document | 
|  | to as Sub-Projects or Components, but the choice of common name does	  |	defined notions of "Operating" and "Container" Projects. These notions | 
|  | not change the characteristics of the Project.				  |	have been abandoned in favour of a more generalized notion of Project. | 
|  | Projects with no child Projects are Operating Projects.			  |	Under this new structure, projects can opt to function as Operating | 
|  | Projects with one or more child Projects are Container Projects.	  |	Projects by choosing not to maintain a code repository. | 
|  | >	See <a href= | 
|  | >	"https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=301065">Bug | 
|  | >	301065. | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	A Project is the main operational unit at Eclipse. | 
|  | >	Specifically, all open source software development at Eclipse occurs | 
|  | >	within the context of a Project. Projects have leaders, developers, | 
|  | >	code, builds, downloads, websites, and more. Projects are more than | 
|  | >	just the sum of their many parts, they are the means by which open | 
|  | >	source work is organized when presented to the communities of | 
|  | >	developers, adopters, and users. Projects provide structure that help | 
|  | >	developers expose their hard work to a broad audience of consumers. | 
|  | >	Eclipse Projects are organized hierarchically. A special type of | 
|  | >	Project, Top-Level Projects, sit at the top of the hierarchy. | 
|  | >	Each Top-Level Project contains one or more Projects. Each Project may | 
|  | >	itself contain zero or more Projects. A project that has one or more | 
|  | >	Projects is said to be the "parent" of those Projects. A Project that | 
|  | >	has a parent is oftentimes referred to as a Sub-Project. The | 
|  | >	term Project refers to either a Top-Level Project or a Sub-Project. | 
|  | >	Projects may be referred to as Sub-Projects or Components, but the | 
|  | >	choice of common name does not change the characteristics of the | 
|  | >	Project. | 
|  | The descendants of a Project are the Project itself and				The descendants of a Project are the Project itself and | 
|  | transitive closure of its child Projects. The top parent of a			transitive closure of its child Projects. The top parent of a | 
|  | Project is the Top-Level Project at the top of the hierarchy.			Project is the Top-Level Project at the top of the hierarchy. | 
|  | Projects are the unit entity for:						Projects are the unit entity for: | 
|  |  | 
|  | Committers									Committers | 
|  | Code and Releases								Code and Releases | 
|  | IP Records									IP Records | 
|  | Community Awareness								Community Awareness | 
|  |  | 
|  | As defined by the <a href=							As defined by the <a href= | 
|  | "/org/documents/Eclipse%20BYLAWS%202003_11_10%20Final.pdf#page=19">Ecl		"/org/documents/Eclipse%20BYLAWS%202003_11_10%20Final.pdf#page=19">Ecl | 
|  | Bylaws - Article VII, the Eclipse Management Organization			Bylaws - Article VII, the Eclipse Management Organization | 
|  | (EMO) consists of the Foundation staff and the Councils. The term		(EMO) consists of the Foundation staff and the Councils. The term | 
|  | EMO(ED), when discussing an approval process, refers to the			EMO(ED), when discussing an approval process, refers to the | 
|  | subset of the EMO consisting of the Executive Director and whomever he		subset of the EMO consisting of the Executive Director and whomever he | 
|  | or she may delegate that specific approval authority to.			or she may delegate that specific approval authority to. | 
|  | 4.1 Committers									4.1 Committers | 
|  | An Operating Project has a self-managing set of Committers. The		  | | 
|  | Committers of an Operating Project have the exclusive right to elect	  |	The previous version of this document | 
|  | new Committers to their Project -- no other group, including a parent	  |	introduced a notion of a "union" of committers that was never fully | 
|  | >	defined or utilized. That notion has been removed. | 
|  | >	We attempt to make it clear that each project has exactly one set of | 
|  | >	committers. This has been driven by the negative experiences of the | 
|  | >	past in attempting to manage multiple committer groups in a single | 
|  | >	project. We further attempt to make it clear that there is no roll-up | 
|  | >	of committers; a committer in a sub-project is not automatically a | 
|  | >	committer in a parent project. | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	Each project has exactly one set of committers. Each Project's set | 
|  | >	of Committers is distinct from that of any other Project, including | 
|  | >	Sub-Projects or parent Projects. All Project Committers have equal | 
|  | >	rights and responsibilities within the Project. Partitioning of | 
|  | >	responsibility within a Project is managed using social convention. A | 
|  | >	Project may, for example, divide itself into logical partitions of | 
|  | >	functionality; it is social convention that prevents Committers from | 
|  | >	one logical partition from doing inappropriate work in another. If | 
|  | >	finer-grained management of committer responsibilities is required, a | 
|  | >	project should consider partitioning (via a <a href= | 
|  | >	"#6_3_8_Restructuring_Review">Restructuring Review) into two or | 
|  | >	more Sub-Projects. | 
|  | >	The Committers of a project have the exclusive right to elect new | 
|  | >	Committers to their Project–no other group, including a parent | 
|  | Project, can force a Project to accept a new Committer.				Project, can force a Project to accept a new Committer. | 
|  | The set of Committers of a Container Project is the union of all the	  |	There is no roll-up of committers: the set of committers on a | 
|  | Committers of the child Projects.					  |	project is exactly that set of people who have been explicitly elected | 
|  | >	into that role for the project (i.e. being a committer on a sub-projec | 
|  | >	does not give you any automatic rights on the "parent" project). | 
|  | >	In practical terms, each Project has a single Unix group of its | 
|  | >	Committers that provides write-access to the Project's resources. | 
|  | >	Pictorially below, we see that a Project, in addition to the various | 
|  | >	resources and Committers it has, can also have zero or more | 
|  | >	Sub-Projects. Each of these Sub-Projects has its own distinct set of | 
|  | >	Committers and resources. | 
|  | > | 
|  | 4.2 Code and Releases								4.2 Code and Releases | 
|  | Each Operating Project owns and maintains a collection of source code	  | | 
|  | and/or web pages.							  |	The previous version of this | 
|  | Each Operating Project is the finest grained unit of infrastructure	  |	document restricted code ownership to the former notion of "Operating" | 
|  | supplied by the Eclipse Foundation. Each Operating Project has a singl	  |	projects. With the generalization of projects, it is now possible for | 
|  | Unix group of its Committers that provides write-access to the		  |	project at any level in the hierarchy to have (or not have) code. | 
|  | Project's files. Each Operating Project has a single bugzilla componen	  |	This version of the document clarifies that a project in the | 
|  | for its bugs. ... The exact infrastructure provided by the Eclipse	  |	incubation phase may make pre-1.0 releases only. | 
|  | Foundation varies over time and is defined outside this process		  | | 
|  | document.								  |	Each Project owns and maintains a collection of resources. | 
|  | While Operating Projects are the finest grained unit of			  |	Resources may include source code, a project website, space on the | 
|  | infrastructure, there are no constraints on Projects self governing	  |	downloads server, access to build resources, and other services | 
|  | themselves with finer-grained divisions on labor. For example, if	  |	provided by the Eclipse Foundation infrastructure. The exact | 
|  | Project A wants to divide its code-based into two modules, A1 and A2,	  |	infrastructure provided by the Eclipse Foundation varies over time and | 
|  | and have separate groups of its Committers work on each module, that's	  |	is defined outside this process document. | 
|  | perfectly acceptable. However, if Project A wants to have fine-grained	  |	A project is not strictly required to make use of all the resources | 
|  | access control for those two groups (i.e., separate unix groups), then	  |	made available; a project might, for example, opt to not | 
|  | Project A will need to become a Container Project and create two new	  |	maintain a source code repository. Such a Project might operate as an | 
|  | Sub-Projects, A.A1 and A.A2, as Operating Projects. That division will	  |	organizational unit, or container, for several Sub-Projects. Similarly | 
|  | require a Creation+Move Review.						  |	a Project might opt to provide a consolidated website, build and/or | 
|  | Container Projects do not have file infrastructure: no Unix group	  |	download site for its Sub-Projects (the Sub-Projects would then not | 
|  | and no repository.							  |	require those resources for themselves). | 
|  | >	Each Project has a single Bugzilla component for its bugs. | 
|  | Any Project in the Mature Phase may make a Release. A Project			Any Project in the Mature Phase may make a Release. A Project | 
|  | in the Incubation Phase with two Mentors may make a Release. A		  |	in the Incubation Phase with two Mentors may make a pre-1.0 | 
|  | Release may include the code from any subset of the Project's		  |	Release. A Release may include the code from any subset of the | 
|  | descendants. However, if any code is included from an Operating		  |	Project's descendants. | 
|  | Project, all the code from that Project must be included. In other	  < | 
|  | words, an Operating Project is the level of granularity of code.	  < | 
|  | 4.3 IP Records									4.3 IP Records | 
|  | A Project at any level may receive IP clearance for contributions and	  |	A Project at any level may receive IP clearance for contributions | 
|  | third-party libraries. IP approval will often include the same approva	  |	and third-party libraries. IP approval will often include the same | 
|  | for all descendant Projects. However, IP clearance will only be grante	  |	approval for all descendant Projects. However, IP clearance will only | 
|  | at the most appropriate technical level thus only Operating Projects	  |	be granted at the most appropriate technical level. | 
|  | should request IP clearance for contributions and Container Projects	  < | 
|  | may request IP clearance for third-party libraries only if a majority	  < | 
|  | of their descendants need that library.					  < | 
|  | 4.4 Community Awareness								4.4 Community Awareness | 
|  | Projects are the level of communication with the larger Eclipse			Projects are the level of communication with the larger Eclipse | 
|  | community and eco-system. Projects may either have their own		  |	community and ecosystem. Projects may either have their own | 
|  | communications (website, mailing lists, newsgroups, etc) or they may b	  |	communications (website, mailing lists, forums/newsgroups, etc) or the | 
|  | part of a parent Project's communications (website, mailing list,	  |	may be part of a parent Project's communications (website, mailing | 
|  | newsgroups, etc). In either case, the Project is required to maintain	  |	list, forums/newsgroups, etc). In either case, the Project is required | 
|  | an open and public communication channel with the Eclipse community	  |	to maintain an open and public communication channel with the Eclipse | 
|  | including, but not limited to, project plans, schedules, design		  |	community including, but not limited to, project plans, schedules, | 
|  | discussions, and so on.							  |	design discussions, and so on. | 
|  | All Projects must make the communication channels easy to find.			All Projects must make the communication channels easy to find. | 
|  | Container Projects are further required to make the separate		  |	Projects are further required to make the separate communication | 
|  | communication channels of their child Projects (if any) easy to		  |	channels of their child Projects (if any) easy to find. | 
|  | find.									  < | 
|  | Any Project in the Incubation Phase must correctly identify its			Any Project in the Incubation Phase must correctly identify its | 
|  | website and Releases. A Container Project with at least one descendant	  |	website and Releases. A Project with at least one descendant Project i | 
|  | Project in Incubation Phase must correctly annotate its own website so	  |	Incubation Phase must correctly annotate its own website so as to | 
|  | as to notify the Eclipse community that incubating Projects exist in	  |	notify the Eclipse community that incubating Projects exist in its | 
|  | its hierarchy. Any Release containing code from an Incubation Phase	  |	hierarchy. Any Release containing code from an Incubation Phase projec | 
|  | project must be correctly labeled, i.e., the Incubation Phase is viral	  |	must be correctly labeled, i.e., the Incubation Phase is viral and | 
|  | and expands to cover all Releases in which it is included.		  |	expands to cover all Releases in which it is included. | 
|  | 4.5 Scope									4.5 Scope | 
|  | Each Top-Level Project has a Charter which describes the			Each Top-Level Project has a Charter which describes the | 
|  | purpose, Scope, and operational rules for the Top-Level Project.		purpose, Scope, and operational rules for the Top-Level Project. | 
|  | The Charter should refer to, and describe any refinements to, the		The Charter should refer to, and describe any refinements to, the | 
|  | provisions of this Development Process. The Board approves the Charter		provisions of this Development Process. The Board approves the Charter | 
|  | of each Top-Level Project.							of each Top-Level Project. | 
|  | Sub-Projects do not have separate Charters; Sub-Projects operate		Sub-Projects do not have separate Charters; Sub-Projects operate | 
|  | under the Charter of their parent Top-Level Project.				under the Charter of their parent Top-Level Project. | 
|  | All Projects have a defined Scope and all initiatives within			All Projects have a defined Scope and all initiatives within | 
|  | that Project are required to reside within that Scope. Initiatives and		that Project are required to reside within that Scope. Initiatives and | 
|  | code that is found to be outside the Scope of a Project may result in		code that is found to be outside the Scope of a Project may result in | 
|  | the termination of the Project. The Scope of Top-Level Projects is par		the termination of the Project. The Scope of Top-Level Projects is par | 
|  | of the Charter, as approved by the Board of Directors of the Eclipse		of the Charter, as approved by the Board of Directors of the Eclipse | 
|  | Foundation.									Foundation. | 
|  | The Scope of a Sub-Project is defined by the initial project			The Scope of a Sub-Project is defined by the initial project | 
|  | proposal as reviewed and approved by the Project Management			proposal as reviewed and approved by the Project Management | 
|  | Committee (PMC) (as further defined below) of the Project's			Committee (PMC) (as further defined below) of the Project's | 
|  | Project's top parent and by the EMO. A Project's Scope must be a subse		Project's top parent and by the EMO. A Project's Scope must be a subse | 
|  | of its parent's Scope.								of its parent's Scope. | 
|  | 4.6 Leaders									4.6 Leaders | 
|  | Top-Level Projects are managed by a Project Management Committee	  | | 
|  | (PMC). Sub-Projects are managed by one or more Project			  |	The previous version of this document | 
|  | Leaders. The PMC Lead(s) of a Top-Level Project are the Project		  |	used confusing language in an attempt to combine the discussion of PMC | 
|  | Leader(s) of that project.						  |	and Project Leads. This version separates these discussions in an | 
|  | PMC Leads are approved by the Board; PMC members and Project Leads	  |	attempt to make more explicit the process of bringing leaders on board | 
|  | are approved by the EMO(ED). The initial Project Leadership is		  |	and the role that the two different types of leaders play. Sections | 
|  | appointed and approved in the Creation Review. Subsequently, additiona	  |	4.6.1 and 4.6.2 are new with this version of the document. | 
|  | Project Leadership (PMC members or Sub-Project Leaders) must be electe	  |	See <a href= | 
|  | by the Project's Committers1 and the Board or EMO(ED) (for		  |	"https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=300002">Bug 300002 | 
|  | PMC members and Sub-Project Leads respectively). In the unlikely event	  |	and Bug | 
|  | that a member of the Project Leadership becomes disruptive to the	  |	300006. | 
|  | process or ceases to contribute for an extended period, the member may	  | | 
|  | be removed by (a) if there are at least two other Project Leaders, the	  |	There are two different types of Project leadership at Eclipse: The | 
|  | unanimous vote of the remaining Project Leadership; or (b) unanimous	  |	Project Management Committee (PMC) and Project Leads. Both forms of | 
|  | vote of the Project Leadership of the parent Project.			  |	leadership are required to: | 
|  | 1Until such time as the Foundation portal supports			  | | 
|  | Project Leader elections, an election held on the Project's developer	  |	ensure that their Project is operating effectively by guiding the | 
|  | mailing list will suffice.						  |	overall direction and by removing obstacles, solving problems, and | 
|  | Each Project's leadership is required to:				  |	resolving conflicts; | 
|  | < | 
|  | ensure that the Project is operating effectively by guiding the		  < | 
|  | Project's overall direction and by removing obstacles, solving		  < | 
|  | problems, and resolving conflicts					  < | 
|  | operate using open source rules of engagement: meritocracy,			operate using open source rules of engagement: meritocracy, | 
|  | transparency, and open participation.					  |	transparency, and open participation; and | 
|  | ensure that the projects and its sub-projects (if any) conform to	  |	ensure that the Project and its Sub-Projects (if any) conform to | 
|  | the Eclipse Foundation IP Policy and procedures.			  |	the Eclipse Foundation IP Policy and Procedures. | 
|  | | | 
|  | In exceptional situations, such as Projects with zero active		  |	The leadership for a Project is composed of the Project's Project | 
|  | Committers or Projects with disruptive Committers and no effective	  |	Lead(s), the leadership of the parent Project (if any) and the PMC | 
|  | Project Leader(s), the Project Leadership Chain has the authority to	  |	Leads and PMC Members for the Top-Level Project. | 
|  | make changes (add, remove) to the set of Committers and/or Project	  |	4.6.1 Project Management Committee | 
|  | Lead(s) of that Project.						  |	(PMC) | 
|  | >	Top-level projects are managed by a Project Management Committee | 
|  | >	(PMC). A PMC has one or more PMC Leads and zero or more PMC Members. | 
|  | >	Together the PMC provides oversight and overall leadership for the | 
|  | >	projects that fall under their top-level project. The PMC as a whole, | 
|  | >	and the PMC Leads in particular, are ultimately responsible for | 
|  | >	ensuring that the Eclipse Development Process is understood and | 
|  | >	followed by their projects. The PMC is additionally responsible for | 
|  | >	maintaining the top-level project's charter. | 
|  | >	PMC Leads are approved by the Board; PMC members are elected by the | 
|  | >	existing PMC Leads and Members, and approved by the EMO(ED). | 
|  | >	4.6.2 Project Lead | 
|  | >	Eclipse Projects are managed by one or more Project Leads. Project | 
|  | >	Leads are responsible for ensuring that their Project's Committers are | 
|  | >	following the Eclipse Development Process, and that the project is | 
|  | >	engaging in the right sorts of activities to develop vibrant | 
|  | >	communities of users, adopters, and contributors. The initial project | 
|  | >	leadership is appointed and approved in the creation review. | 
|  | >	Subsequently, additional Project Leads must be elected by the project' | 
|  | >	Committers and approved by the Project's PMC and the EMO(ED). | 
|  | >	In the unlikely event that a member of the Project leadership | 
|  | >	becomes disruptive to the process or ceases to contribute for an | 
|  | >	extended period, the member may be removed by the unanimous vote of th | 
|  | >	remaining Project Leads (if there are at least two other Project | 
|  | >	Leads), or unanimous vote of the Project's PMC. | 
|  | >	In exceptional situations, such as projects with zero active | 
|  | >	committers or projects with disruptive Committers and no effective | 
|  | >	Project Leads, the Project Leadership Chain has the authority to make | 
|  | >	changes (add, remove) to the set of committers and/or Project Leads of | 
|  | >	that project. | 
|  | 4.7 Committers and								4.7 Committers and | 
|  | Contributors									Contributors | 
|  | Each Project has a Development Team, led by the Project Leaders.	  < | 
|  | The Development Team is composed of Committers and			  < | 
|  | Contributors. Contributors are individuals who contribute		  < | 
|  | code, fixes, tests, documentation, or other work that is part of the	  < | 
|  | Project. Committers have write access to the source code		  < | 
|  | repository(ies) of the Project and are expected to influence the	  < | 
|  | Project's development.							  < | 
|  | < | 
|  |  | 
|  | >	The previous version | 
|  | >	made specific references to the types of resources that a committer ha | 
|  | >	write access to (code, web, and Bugzilla). In this version, the | 
|  | >	discussion of the resources has been generalized. | 
|  |  | 
|  | >	Each Project has a Development Team, led by the Project | 
|  | >	Leaders. The Development Team is composed of Committers and | 
|  | >	Contributors. Contributors are individuals who contribute | 
|  | >	code, fixes, tests, documentation, or other work that is part of the | 
|  | >	Project. Committers have write access to the Project's resources | 
|  | >	(source code repository, bug tracking system, website, build server, | 
|  | >	downloads, etc.) and are expected to influence the Project's | 
|  | >	development. | 
|  | See guidelines and								See guidelines and | 
|  | checklists for electing a new committer.					checklists for electing a new committer. | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | Contributors who have the trust of the Project's Committers can,		Contributors who have the trust of the Project's Committers can, | 
|  | through election, be promoted Committer for that Project. The breadth		through election, be promoted Committer for that Project. The breadth | 
|  | of a Committer's influence corresponds to the breadth of their			of a Committer's influence corresponds to the breadth of their | 
|  | contribution. A Development Team's Contributors and Committers may (an		contribution. A Development Team's Contributors and Committers may (an | 
|  | should) come from a diverse set of organizations. A Committer has writ	  |	should) come from a diverse set of organizations. A Committer gains | 
|  | access to the source code repository for the Project and/or website	  |	voting rights allowing them to affect the future of the Project. | 
|  | and/or bug tracking system. A Committer gains voting rights allowing	  |	Becoming a Committer is a privilege that is earned by contributing and | 
|  | them to affect the future of the Project. Becoming a Committer is a	  |	showing discipline and good judgment. It is a responsibility that | 
|  | privilege that is earned by contributing and showing discipline and	  |	should be neither given nor taken lightly, nor is it a right based on | 
|  | good judgment. It is a responsibility that should be neither given nor	  |	employment by an Eclipse Member company or any company employing | 
|  | taken lightly, nor is it a right based on employment by an Eclipse	  |	existing committers. | 
|  | Member company or any company employing existing committers.		  |	The election process begins with an existing Committer on the same | 
|  | The election process for Committers uses the open and transparent	  |	Project nominating the Contributor. The Project's Committers will vote | 
|  | portal election system. The election process begins with an existing	  |	for a period of no less than one week of standard business days. If | 
|  | Committer on the same Project nominating the Contribtor. The Project's	  |	there are at least three (3) positive votes and no negative votes | 
|  | Committers will vote for a period of no less than one week of standard	  |	within the voting period, the Contributor is recommended to the | 
|  | business days. If there are at least three (3) positive votes and no	  |	project's PMC for commit privileges. If there are three (3) or fewer | 
|  | negative votes within the voting period, the Contributor is recommende	  |	Committers on the Project, a unanimous positive vote of all Committers | 
|  | to the root project's PMC for commit privileges. If there are three (3	  |	is substituted. If the PMC approves, and the Contributor signs the | 
|  | or fewer Committers on the Project, a unanimous positive vote of all	  |	appropriate Committer legal agreements established by the EMO (wherein | 
|  | Committers is substituted. If the PMC approves, and the Contributor	  |	at the very least, the Developer agrees to abide by the Eclipse | 
|  | signs the appropriate Committer legal agreements established by the EM	  |	Intellectual Property Policy), the Contributor becomes a Committer and | 
|  | (wherein, at the very least, the Developer agrees to abide by the	  |	is given write access to the source code for that Project. | 
|  | Eclipse Intellectual Property Policy), the Contributor becomes a	  < | 
|  | Committer and is given write access to the source code for that		  < | 
|  | Project.								  < | 
|  | At times, Committers may become inactive for a variety of reasons.		At times, Committers may become inactive for a variety of reasons. | 
|  | The decision making process of the Project relies on active committers		The decision making process of the Project relies on active committers | 
|  | who respond to discussions and vote in a constructive and timely		who respond to discussions and vote in a constructive and timely | 
|  | manner. The Project Leaders are responsible for ensuring the smooth		manner. The Project Leaders are responsible for ensuring the smooth | 
|  | operation of the Project. A Committer who is disruptive, does not		operation of the Project. A Committer who is disruptive, does not | 
|  | participate actively, or has been inactive for an extended period may		participate actively, or has been inactive for an extended period may | 
|  | have his or her commit status revoked by the Project Leaders. (Unless		have his or her commit status revoked by the Project Leaders. (Unless | 
|  | otherwise specified, "an extended period" is defined as "no activity		otherwise specified, "an extended period" is defined as "no activity | 
|  | for more than six months".)							for more than six months".) | 
|  | Active participation in the user newsgroup and the appropriate		  |	Active participation in the user forums/newsgroups and the | 
|  | developer mailing lists is a responsibility of all Committers, and is	  |	appropriate developer mailing lists is a responsibility of all | 
|  | critical to the success of the Project. Committers are required to	  |	Committers, and is critical to the success of the Project. Committers | 
|  | monitor and contribute to the user newsgroup.				  |	are required to monitor and contribute to the user | 
|  | >	forums/newsgroups. | 
|  | Committers are required to monitor the mailing lists associated with		Committers are required to monitor the mailing lists associated with | 
|  | the Project. This is a condition of being granted commit rights to the		the Project. This is a condition of being granted commit rights to the | 
|  | Project. It is mandatory because committers must participate in votes		Project. It is mandatory because committers must participate in votes | 
|  | (which in some cases require a certain minimum number of votes) and		(which in some cases require a certain minimum number of votes) and | 
|  | must respond to the mailing list in a timely fashion in order to		must respond to the mailing list in a timely fashion in order to | 
|  | facilitate the smooth operation of the Project. When a Committer is		facilitate the smooth operation of the Project. When a Committer is | 
|  | granted commit rights they will be added to the appropriate mailing		granted commit rights they will be added to the appropriate mailing | 
|  | lists. A Committer must not be unsubscribed from a developer mailing		lists. A Committer must not be unsubscribed from a developer mailing | 
|  | list unless their associated commit privileges are also revoked.		list unless their associated commit privileges are also revoked. | 
|  | Committers are required to track, participate in, and vote on,			Committers are required to track, participate in, and vote on, | 
|  | relevant discussions in their associated Projects and components. Ther		relevant discussions in their associated Projects and components. Ther | 
|  | are three voting responses: +1 (yes), -1 (no, or veto), and 0			are three voting responses: +1 (yes), -1 (no, or veto), and 0 | 
|  | (abstain).									(abstain). | 
|  | Committers are responsible for proactively reporting problems in the		Committers are responsible for proactively reporting problems in the | 
|  | bug tracking system, and annotating problem reports with status			bug tracking system, and annotating problem reports with status | 
|  | information, explanations, clarifications, or requests for more			information, explanations, clarifications, or requests for more | 
|  | information from the submitter. Committers are responsible for updatin		information from the submitter. Committers are responsible for updatin | 
|  | problem reports when they have done work related to the problem.		problem reports when they have done work related to the problem. | 
|  | Committer, PMC Lead, Project Lead, and Council Representative(s) are		Committer, PMC Lead, Project Lead, and Council Representative(s) are | 
|  | roles; an individual may take on more than one of these roles			roles; an individual may take on more than one of these roles | 
|  | simultaneously.									simultaneously. | 
|  | 4.8 Councils									4.8 Councils | 
|  | The three Councils defined in Bylaws section VII are comprised of		The three Councils defined in Bylaws section VII are comprised of | 
|  | Strategic members and PMC representatives. The three Councils help		Strategic members and PMC representatives. The three Councils help | 
|  | guide the Projects as follows:							guide the Projects as follows: | 
|  |  | 
|  | The Requirements Council is primarily responsible for the			The Requirements Council is primarily responsible for the | 
|  | Eclipse Roadmap. There will always be more requirements than there are		Eclipse Roadmap. There will always be more requirements than there are | 
|  | resources to satisfy them, thus the Requirements Council gathers,		resources to satisfy them, thus the Requirements Council gathers, | 
|  | reviews, and categorizes all of these incoming requirements - from the		reviews, and categorizes all of these incoming requirements - from the | 
|  | entire Eclipse ecosystem - and proposes a coherent set of Themes and		entire Eclipse ecosystem - and proposes a coherent set of Themes and | 
|  | Priorities.									Priorities. | 
|  | The Planning Council is responsible for establishing a				The Planning Council is responsible for establishing a | 
|  | coordinated Simultaneous Release (a.k.a, "the release train") that		coordinated Simultaneous Release (a.k.a, "the release train") that | 
|  | supports the Themes and Priorities in the Roadmap. The Planning Counci		supports the Themes and Priorities in the Roadmap. The Planning Counci | 
|  | is responsible for cross-project planning, architectural issues, user		is responsible for cross-project planning, architectural issues, user | 
|  | interface conflicts, and all other coordination and integration issues		interface conflicts, and all other coordination and integration issues | 
|  | The Planning Council discharges its responsibility via collaborative		The Planning Council discharges its responsibility via collaborative | 
|  | evaluation, prioritization, and compromise.					evaluation, prioritization, and compromise. | 
|  |  | 
|  | |	See guidelines | 
|  | |	and checklists for the Architecture Council. | 
|  | < | 
|  | See guidelines and							  < | 
|  | checklists for the Architecture Council.				  < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | The Architecture Council is responsible for the development,			The Architecture Council is responsible for the development, | 
|  | articulation, and maintenance of the Eclipse Platform Architecture and		articulation, and maintenance of the Eclipse Platform Architecture and | 
|  | ensuring the Principles of the Development Process through mentorship.		ensuring the Principles of the Development Process through mentorship. | 
|  | Membership in the Architecture Council is per the Bylaws through		Membership in the Architecture Council is per the Bylaws through | 
|  | Strategic Membership, PMCs, and by appointment. The Architecture		Strategic Membership, PMCs, and by appointment. The Architecture | 
|  | Council will, at least annually, recommend to the EMO(ED), Eclipse		Council will, at least annually, recommend to the EMO(ED), Eclipse | 
|  | Members who have sufficient experience, wisdom, and time to be			Members who have sufficient experience, wisdom, and time to be | 
|  | appointed to the Architecture Council and serve as Mentors. Election a		appointed to the Architecture Council and serve as Mentors. Election a | 
|  | a Mentor is a highly visible confirmation of the Eclipse community's		a Mentor is a highly visible confirmation of the Eclipse community's | 
|  | respect for the candidate's technical vision, good judgement, software		respect for the candidate's technical vision, good judgement, software | 
|  | development skills, past and future contributions to Eclipse. It is a		development skills, past and future contributions to Eclipse. It is a | 
|  | role that should be neither given nor taken lightly. Appointed members		role that should be neither given nor taken lightly. Appointed members | 
|  | of the Architecture Council are appointed to two year renewable			of the Architecture Council are appointed to two year renewable | 
|  | terms.										terms. | 
|  |  | 
|  | >	4.9 Incubator Projects | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	This version of this document formalizes the notion of an | 
|  | >	"Incubator" project. The original draft of this document attempted to | 
|  | >	restrict the number and structure of incubators, but the language was | 
|  | >	removed to allow for future flexibility. A project may have more than | 
|  | >	one incubator; an incubator project may itself have an incubator | 
|  | >	sub-project. Creating multiple incubators is expected to be atypical; | 
|  | >	attempts to create multiple incubators will be challenged by the PMC | 
|  | >	and EMO. | 
|  | >	An important requirement for an incubator is that there must be some | 
|  | >	set of committers from the parent project who are also committers on | 
|  | >	the incubator. Since incubators are never expected to graduate, they d | 
|  | >	not require mentors. | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	A Project may designate a Sub-Project as an "Incubator". An | 
|  | >	Incubator is a Project that is intended to perpetually remain in the | 
|  | >	Incubation phase. Incubators are an | 
|  | >	excellent place to innovate, test new ideas, grow functionality that | 
|  | >	may one day be moved into another Project, and develop new | 
|  | >	committers. | 
|  | >	Incubator Projects never have releases; they do not require yearly | 
|  | >	continuation reviews and they are not part of the annual release train | 
|  | >	Incubators may have builds, and downloads. They conform to the standar | 
|  | >	incubation branding requirements and are subject to the IP due | 
|  | >	diligence rules outlined for incubating Projects. Incubators do not | 
|  | >	graduate. | 
|  | >	The scope of an Incubator Project must fall within the scope of its | 
|  | >	parent project. The committer group of the Incubator Project must | 
|  | >	overlap with that of the parent project (at least one committer from | 
|  | >	the parent project must be a committer for the Incubator). Incubator | 
|  | >	projects do not require Architecture Council mentors (the parent | 
|  | >	project's committers are responsible for ensuring that the Incubator | 
|  | >	project conform to the rules set forth by the Eclipse Development | 
|  | >	Process). | 
|  | >	An Incubator project should designated as such by including the word | 
|  | >	"Incubator" in its name (e.g. "Eclipse Incubator"). To do otherwise is | 
|  | >	considered exceptional and requires approval from the PMC and | 
|  | >	EMO(ED). | 
|  | >	Only Top-Level Projects and Projects in the <a href= | 
|  | >	"#6_2_4_Mature">Mature phase may create an Incubator. Incubators | 
|  | >	are created via a Creation Review. | 
|  | >	Alternatively, an Incubator can be created as part of a <a href= | 
|  | >	"#6_3_2_Graduation_Review">Graduation, <a href= | 
|  | >	"#6_3_4_Promotion_Review">Promotion, or <a href= | 
|  | >	"#6_3_8_Restructuring_Review">Restructuring Review. | 
|  | 5. Roadmap Process								5. Roadmap Process | 
|  | The Roadmap describes the collective Eclipse Projects future direction	  | | 
|  | and consists of two parts:						  |	This section has been modified to explicitly state that project may | 
|  | >	opt to aggregate their plan with that of descendant projects. | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	The Roadmap describes the collective Eclipse Projects future | 
|  | >	directions and consists of two parts: | 
|  |  | 
|  | Themes and Priorities from the Requirements Council				Themes and Priorities from the Requirements Council | 
|  | Project Plans from Projects							Project Plans from Projects | 
|  |  | 
|  | The Roadmap must be consistent with the Purposes as described in Bylaw	  |	The Roadmap must be consistent with the Purposes as described in | 
|  | section 1.1. It is developed using the prescribed <a href=		  |	Bylaws section 1.1. It is developed using the prescribed <a href= | 
|  | "/org/councils/roadmap_v2_0/index.php#process">roadmap process.			"/org/councils/roadmap_v2_0/index.php#process">roadmap process. | 
|  | The Roadmap is prepared by the Councils and approved by the Board		The Roadmap is prepared by the Councils and approved by the Board | 
|  | annually. A proposed Roadmap or Roadmap update is disseminated to the		annually. A proposed Roadmap or Roadmap update is disseminated to the | 
|  | Membership at Large for comment and feedback in advance of its			Membership at Large for comment and feedback in advance of its | 
|  | adoption. This dissemination and all discussion and debate around the		adoption. This dissemination and all discussion and debate around the | 
|  | Roadmap must be held in an open and transparent public forum, such as		Roadmap must be held in an open and transparent public forum, such as | 
|  | mailing lists or newsgroups.							mailing lists or newsgroups. | 
|  | Prior to any Board vote to approve a Roadmap or Roadmap update,			Prior to any Board vote to approve a Roadmap or Roadmap update, | 
|  | every Member has the right to communicate concerns and objections to		every Member has the right to communicate concerns and objections to | 
|  | the Board.									the Board. | 
|  | The process of producing or updating the Roadmap is expected to be		The process of producing or updating the Roadmap is expected to be | 
|  | iterative. An initial set of Themes and Priorities may be infeasible t		iterative. An initial set of Themes and Priorities may be infeasible t | 
|  | implement in the desired timeframe; subsequent consideration may revea		implement in the desired timeframe; subsequent consideration may revea | 
|  | new implementation alternatives or critical requirements that alter th		new implementation alternatives or critical requirements that alter th | 
|  | team's perspective on priorities. The EMO orchestrates interaction		team's perspective on priorities. The EMO orchestrates interaction | 
|  | among and within the Councils to drive the Roadmap to convergence.		among and within the Councils to drive the Roadmap to convergence. | 
|  | This Development Process, the EMO, the Councils, and the Projects		This Development Process, the EMO, the Councils, and the Projects | 
|  | all acknowledge that the success of the Eclipse ecosystem is dependent		all acknowledge that the success of the Eclipse ecosystem is dependent | 
|  | on a balanced set of requirements and implementations. A Roadmap that		on a balanced set of requirements and implementations. A Roadmap that | 
|  | provides too large a burden on the Projects will be rejected and		provides too large a burden on the Projects will be rejected and | 
|  | ignored; similarly, a Roadmap that provides no predictable Project		ignored; similarly, a Roadmap that provides no predictable Project | 
|  | plans will be unhelpful to the business and technical plans being		plans will be unhelpful to the business and technical plans being | 
|  | created by the ecosystem. A careful balance of demands and commitments		created by the ecosystem. A careful balance of demands and commitments | 
|  | is essential to the ongoing success of the Eclipse Projects,			is essential to the ongoing success of the Eclipse Projects, | 
|  | frameworks, and ecosystem.							frameworks, and ecosystem. | 
|  | The Project Leadership is expected to ensure that their Project			The Project Leadership is expected to ensure that their Project | 
|  | Plans are consistent with the Roadmap, and that all plans, technical		Plans are consistent with the Roadmap, and that all plans, technical | 
|  | documents and reports are publicly available. To meet this requirement		documents and reports are publicly available. To meet this requirement | 
|  | each Project is required to create a transparently available Project		each Project is required to create a transparently available Project | 
|  | Plan in an EMO-defined file format that meets the following			Plan in an EMO-defined file format that meets the following | 
|  | criteria:									criteria: | 
|  |  | 
|  | Enumerates the areas of change in the frameworks and tools for each		Enumerates the areas of change in the frameworks and tools for each | 
|  | proposed Release								proposed Release | 
|  | Consistent with and categorized in terms of the themes and			Consistent with and categorized in terms of the themes and | 
|  | priorities of the Roadmap							priorities of the Roadmap | 
|  | Identifies and accommodates cross-project dependencies				Identifies and accommodates cross-project dependencies | 
|  | Addresses requirements critical to the Ecosystem and/or the			Addresses requirements critical to the Ecosystem and/or the | 
|  | Membership at Large								Membership at Large | 
|  | Advances the Project in functionality, quality, and				Advances the Project in functionality, quality, and | 
|  | performance									performance | 
|  |  | 
|  | A Project may incrementally revise their Project Plan to deliver		A Project may incrementally revise their Project Plan to deliver | 
|  | additional tasks provided that:							additional tasks provided that: | 
|  |  | 
|  | the approved Roadmap is not put in jeopardy; and				the approved Roadmap is not put in jeopardy; and | 
|  | the work is consistent with the Project Plan criteria (as described		the work is consistent with the Project Plan criteria (as described | 
|  | above)										above) | 
|  |  | 
|  | >	A project may produce an aggregate plan for itself and its | 
|  | >	descendants. In this case descendents would share their ancestor's | 
|  | >	plan. | 
|  | 6. Development Process								6. Development Process | 
|  | All Eclipse Projects, and hence all Project Proposals, must be			All Eclipse Projects, and hence all Project Proposals, must be | 
|  | consistent with the Purposes and the then-current Roadmap.			consistent with the Purposes and the then-current Roadmap. | 
|  | Projects must work within their Scope. Projects that desire to			Projects must work within their Scope. Projects that desire to | 
|  | expand beyond their current Scope must seek an enlargement of their		expand beyond their current Scope must seek an enlargement of their | 
|  | Scope using a public Review as described below.					Scope using a public Review as described below. | 
|  | All projects are required to report their status at least quarterly		All projects are required to report their status at least quarterly | 
|  | using the <a href=								using the <a href= | 
|  | "/projects/dev_process/project-status-infrastructure.php">EMO defined		"/projects/dev_process/project-status-infrastructure.php">EMO defined | 
|  | status reporting procedures.							status reporting procedures. | 
|  | Projects must provide advanced notification of upcoming features and		Projects must provide advanced notification of upcoming features and | 
|  | frameworks via their Project Plan.						frameworks via their Project Plan. | 
|  | 6.1 Mentors									6.1 Mentors | 
|  | New Proposals that intend to do a Release are required to have at leas	  |	New Proposals that intend to do a Release are required to have at | 
|  | two Mentors. New Proposals that will only Release code as part		  |	least two Mentors. New Proposals that will only Release code as | 
|  | of a parent Project's Release are not required to have Mentors. Mentor	  |	part of a parent Project's Release are not required to have Mentors. | 
|  | must be members of the Architecture Council. The Mentors (including	  |	Mentors must be members of the Architecture Council. The Mentors | 
|  | name, affiliation, and current Eclipse projects/roles) must be listed	  |	(including name, affiliation, and current Eclipse projects/roles) must | 
|  | in the Proposal. Mentors are required to monitor and advise the new	  |	be listed in the Proposal. Mentors are required to monitor and advise | 
|  | Project during its Incubation Phase, but are released from that duty	  |	the new Project during its Incubation Phase, but are released from tha | 
|  | once the Project graduates to the Mature Phase.				  |	duty once the Project graduates to the Mature Phase. | 
|  | The Mentors must attend the Creation and Graduation Reviews.		  < | 
|  | 6.2 Project Lifecycle								6.2 Project Lifecycle | 
|  | <img src="/projects/images/Development-process-small.gif" align=		<img src="/projects/images/Development-process-small.gif" align= | 
|  | "right"> Projects go through six distinct phases. The transitions from	  |	"right"> | 
|  | phase to phase are open and transparent public reviews.			  |	Projects go through six distinct phases. The transitions from phase | 
|  | >	to phase are open and transparent public reviews. | 
|  | 6.2.1 Pre-proposal								6.2.1 Pre-proposal | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | See guidelines and								See guidelines and | 
|  | checklists about writing a proposal.						checklists about writing a proposal. | 
|  | |	An individual or group of individuals declares their interest in, | 
|  | |	and rationale for, establishing a project. The EMO will assist such | 
|  | |	groups in the preparation of a project Proposal. | 
|  | An individual or group of individuals declares their interest in, and	  < | 
|  | rationale for, establishing a project. The EMO will assist such groups	  < | 
|  | in the preparation of a project Proposal.				  < | 
|  |  | 
|  | The Pre-proposal phase ends when the Proposal is published by EMO		The Pre-proposal phase ends when the Proposal is published by EMO | 
|  | and announced to the membership by the EMO.					and announced to the membership by the EMO. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 6.2.2 Proposal									6.2.2 Proposal | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | See guidelines and								See guidelines and | 
|  | checklists about gathering support for a proposal.				checklists about gathering support for a proposal. | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | The proposers, in conjunction with the destination PMC and the			The proposers, in conjunction with the destination PMC and the | 
|  | community, collaborate in public to enhance, refine, and clarify the		community, collaborate in public to enhance, refine, and clarify the | 
|  | proposal. Mentors (if necessary) for the project must be identified		proposal. Mentors (if necessary) for the project must be identified | 
|  | during this phase.								during this phase. | 
|  |  | 
|  | The Proposal phase ends with a Creation Review or a Termination		  |	The Proposal phase ends with a <a href= | 
|  | Review.									  |	"#6_3_1_Creation_Review">Creation Review, or withdrawal. | 
|  | >	The Proposal may be withdrawn by the proposers. | 
|  | >	The EMO(ED) will withdraw a proposal that has been inactive for | 
|  | >	more than six months. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 6.2.3 Incubation								6.2.3 Incubation | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | See guidelines and								See guidelines and | 
|  | checklists about incubation.							checklists about incubation. | 
|  | |	After the project has been created, the purpose of the incubation | 
|  | |	phase is to establish a fully-functioning open-source project. In this | 
|  | < | 
|  | After the project has been created, the purpose of the incubation phas	  < | 
|  | is to establish a fully-functioning open-source project. In this	  < | 
|  | context, incubation is about developing the process, the community, an		context, incubation is about developing the process, the community, an | 
|  | the technology. Incubation is a phase rather than a place: new project		the technology. Incubation is a phase rather than a place: new project | 
|  | may be incubated under any existing Project.					may be incubated under any existing Project. | 
|  |  | 
|  | The Incubation phase may continue with a Continuation Review or a		The Incubation phase may continue with a Continuation Review or a | 
|  | Release Review.									Release Review. | 
|  | Top-Level Projects cannot be incubated and can only be created from		Top-Level Projects cannot be incubated and can only be created from | 
|  | one or more existing Mature-phase Projects.					one or more existing Mature-phase Projects. | 
|  | The Incubation phase ends with a Graduation Review or a Termination		The Incubation phase ends with a Graduation Review or a Termination | 
|  | Review.										Review. | 
|  | >	Designated Incubator Projects may | 
|  | >	remain perpetually in the Incubation phase; no reviews are | 
|  | >	required. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Many Eclipse Projects are proposed and initiated by individuals with		Many Eclipse Projects are proposed and initiated by individuals with | 
|  | extensive and successful software development experience. This documen		extensive and successful software development experience. This documen | 
|  | attempts to define a process that is sufficiently flexible to learn		attempts to define a process that is sufficiently flexible to learn | 
|  | from all its participants. At the same time, however, the Incubation		from all its participants. At the same time, however, the Incubation | 
|  | phase is useful for new Projects to learn the community-defined			phase is useful for new Projects to learn the community-defined | 
|  | Eclipse-centric open source processes.						Eclipse-centric open source processes. | 
|  | |	See guidelines | 
|  | |	and checklists for utilizing the Parallel IP process. | 
|  | |	Only projects that are properly identified as being in the | 
|  | See guidelines and							  |	incubation phase (including designated <a href= | 
|  | checklists for utilizing the Parallel IP process.			  |	"#4_9_Incubators">Incubator Projects) may use the Parallel IP | 
|  | |	process to reduce IP clearance process for new contributions. | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | Only projects that are properly identified as being in the incubation	  < | 
|  | phase may use the Parallel IP process to reduce IP clearance process	  < | 
|  | for new contributions.							  < | 
|  | 6.2.4 Mature									6.2.4 Mature | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | See guidelines and								See guidelines and | 
|  | checklists about the mature phase.						checklists about the mature phase. | 
|  | |	The project team has demonstrated that they are an open-source | 
|  | |	project with an open and transparent process; an actively involved and | 
|  | |	growing community; and Eclipse Quality technology. The project is now | 
|  | The project team has demonstrated that they are an open-source project	  |	mature member of the Eclipse Community. Major releases continue to go | 
|  | with an open and transparent process; an actively involved and growing	  |	through Release Reviews. | 
|  | community; and Eclipse Quality technology. The project is now a mature	  < | 
|  | member of the Eclipse Community. Major releases continue to go through	  < | 
|  | Release Reviews.							  < | 
|  |  | 
|  | Mature phase projects have Releases through Release Reviews.			Mature phase projects have Releases through Release Reviews. | 
|  | A Mature Project may be promoted to a Top-Level Project through a		A Mature Project may be promoted to a Top-Level Project through a | 
|  | Promotion Review.								Promotion Review. | 
|  | A Mature Project that does not participate in a Release in given		A Mature Project that does not participate in a Release in given | 
|  | year may continue through a Continuation Review.				year may continue through a Continuation Review. | 
|  | Inactive Mature phase projects may be archived through a			Inactive Mature phase projects may be archived through a | 
|  | Termination Review.								Termination Review. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 6.2.5 Top-Level									6.2.5 Top-Level | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | See guidelines and								See guidelines and | 
|  | checklists about being a top-level project.					checklists about being a top-level project. | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | Projects that have demonstrated the characteristics of a Top-Level		Projects that have demonstrated the characteristics of a Top-Level | 
|  | Project (e.g., consistent leadership in a technical area and the		Project (e.g., consistent leadership in a technical area and the | 
|  | recruitment of a wider developer community) can be promoted to			recruitment of a wider developer community) can be promoted to | 
|  | Top-Level Project status. This promotion occurs through a Promotion		Top-Level Project status. This promotion occurs through a Promotion | 
|  | Review. Upon the successful completion of a Promotion Review, the		Review. Upon the successful completion of a Promotion Review, the | 
|  | EMO(ED) may recommend that the project be promoted to the Board of		EMO(ED) may recommend that the project be promoted to the Board of | 
|  | Directors and ask that its Charter be reviewed and approved.			Directors and ask that its Charter be reviewed and approved. | 
|  | 6.2.6 Archived									6.2.6 Archived | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | See guidelines and								See guidelines and | 
|  | checklists for archiving projects.						checklists for archiving projects. | 
|  | |	Projects that become inactive, either through dwindling resources or | 
|  | |	by reaching their natural conclusion, are archived. Projects can reach | 
|  | < | 
|  | Projects that become inactive, either through dwindling resources or b	  < | 
|  | reaching their natural conclusion, are archived. Projects can reach	  < | 
|  | their natural conclusion in a number of ways: for example, a project		their natural conclusion in a number of ways: for example, a project | 
|  | might become so popular that it is absorbed into one of the other majo		might become so popular that it is absorbed into one of the other majo | 
|  | frameworks. Projects are moved to Archived status through a Terminatio		frameworks. Projects are moved to Archived status through a Terminatio | 
|  | Review.										Review. | 
|  | If there is sufficient community interest in reactivating an			If there is sufficient community interest in reactivating an | 
|  | Archived Project, the Project will start again with Creation Review. A		Archived Project, the Project will start again with Creation Review. A | 
|  | there must be good reasons to have moved a Project to the Archives, th		there must be good reasons to have moved a Project to the Archives, th | 
|  | Creation Review provides a sufficiently high bar to prove that those		Creation Review provides a sufficiently high bar to prove that those | 
|  | reasons are no longer valid. It also ensures that the original or		reasons are no longer valid. It also ensures that the original or | 
|  | updated project goals are still consistent with the Purposes and		updated project goals are still consistent with the Purposes and | 
|  | Roadmap.									Roadmap. | 
|  | 6.3 Reviews									6.3 Reviews | 
|  | The Eclipse Development Process is predicated on open and transparent	  | | 
|  | behavior. All major changes to Eclipse projects must be announced and	  |	This iteration of the document removes the notion of a "review call" | 
|  | reviewed by the membership-at-large. Major changes include the Project	  |	in favour of a "review period" during which the community is given an | 
|  | Phase transitions as well as the introduction or exclusion of		  |	opportunity to comment. This acknowledges the reality that the optiona | 
|  | significant new technology or capability. It is a clear requirement of	  |	review calls required by the previous | 
|  | this document that members who are monitoring the appropriate media	  |	version of this document never actually occurred. Given | 
|  | channels (e.g., mailing lists or RSS feeds) not be surprised by the	  |	that there will be no review calls, references to "slides" have been | 
|  | post-facto actions of the Projects.					  |	removed. | 
|  | >	See <a href= | 
|  | >	"https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=304878">Bug | 
|  | >	304878. | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	The Eclipse Development Process is predicated on open and | 
|  | >	transparent behavior. All major changes to Eclipse projects must be | 
|  | >	announced and reviewed by the membership-at-large. Major changes | 
|  | >	include the Project Phase transitions as well as the introduction or | 
|  | >	exclusion of significant new technology or capability. It is a clear | 
|  | >	requirement of this document that members who are monitoring the | 
|  | >	appropriate media channels (e.g., mailing lists or RSS feeds) not be | 
|  | >	surprised by the post-facto actions of the Projects. | 
|  | All Projects are required to participate in at least one Review per		All Projects are required to participate in at least one Review per | 
|  | year.										year. | 
|  | For each Review, the project leadership makes a presentation			For each Review, the project leadership makes a presentation | 
|  | to, and receives feedback from, the Eclipse membership.				to, and receives feedback from, the Eclipse membership. | 
|  | A Review is a fairly comprehensive process. Gathering the material		A Review is a fairly comprehensive process. Gathering the material | 
|  | for a Review and preparing the presentation is a non-trivial effort,		for a Review and preparing the presentation is a non-trivial effort, | 
|  | but the introspection offered by this exercise is useful for the		but the introspection offered by this exercise is useful for the | 
|  | Project and results are very useful for the entire Eclipse community.		Project and results are very useful for the entire Eclipse community. | 
|  | In addition, Reviews have a specific relationship to the requirements		In addition, Reviews have a specific relationship to the requirements | 
|  | of the Eclipse IP								of the Eclipse IP | 
|  | Policy.										Policy. | 
|  | All Reviews have the same general process:					All Reviews have the same general process: | 
|  |  | 
|  | Projects are responsible for initiating the appropriate reviews.		Projects are responsible for initiating the appropriate reviews. | 
|  | However, if a Project does not do so and the EMO believes a Review is		However, if a Project does not do so and the EMO believes a Review is | 
|  | necessary, the EMO may initiate a Review on the Project's behalf. The	  |	necessary, the EMO may initiate a Review on the Project's behalf. | 
|  | Project Leader initiates a review through the portal.2			  < | 
|  | A Review then continues with the Project's Leadership requesting		A Review then continues with the Project's Leadership requesting | 
|  | that the EMO(ED) schedule the Review.						that the EMO(ED) schedule the Review. | 
|  | No less than one week in advance of the Review conference call, and	  |	Prior to the start of the review period, the Project leadership | 
|  | preferably at least two weeks in advance, the Project leadership	  |	provides the EMO with review documentation. | 
|  | provides the EMO with the archival presentation material.		  | | 
|  | |	The review documentation material always includes a document that | 
|  | The presentation material always includes a summary slide		  |	describes the review. The minimum contents of the document are | 
|  | presentation or document. The minimum contents of the presentation are	  |	specified by the individual Review types. | 
|  | proscribed by the individual Review types.				  < | 
|  | The presentation material must be available in a format that anyone		The presentation material must be available in a format that anyone | 
|  | in the Eclipse membership can review. For example, Microsoft Powerpoin		in the Eclipse membership can review. For example, Microsoft Powerpoin | 
|  | files are not an acceptable single format - such files may be one of	  |	files are not an acceptable single format: such files may be one of th | 
|  | the formats, but not the only format. Similarly for Apple Keynote file	  |	formats, but not the only format. Similarly for Apple Keynote files an | 
|  | and Microsoft Word files. PDF and HTML are acceptable single		  |	Microsoft Word files. PDF and HTML are acceptable single formats. | 
|  | formats.								  < | 
|  | The presentation material must have a correct copyright statement		The presentation material must have a correct copyright statement | 
|  | and license.									and license. | 
|  | The presentation material must be archival quality. This			The presentation material must be archival quality. This | 
|  | means that the materials must be comprehensible and complete on their		means that the materials must be comprehensible and complete on their | 
|  | own without requiring explanation by a human presenter, reference to a		own without requiring explanation by a human presenter, reference to a | 
|  | wiki, or to other non-archived web pages.					wiki, or to other non-archived web pages. | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | The EMO announces the Review schedule and makes the presentation	  |	The EMO announces the Review schedule and makes the documentation | 
|  | materials available to the membership-at-large.				  |	available to the membership-at-large. | 
|  |  | 
|  | The criteria for the successful completion of each type of Review will	  |	The criteria for the successful completion of each type of Review | 
|  | be documented in writing by the EMO in guidelines made available via	  |	will be documented in writing by the EMO in guidelines made available | 
|  | the www.eclipse.org website. Such guidelines will include, but are not	  |	via the www.eclipse.org website. Such guidelines will include, but are | 
|  | limited to the following:						  |	not limited to the following: | 
|  |  | 
|  | Clear evidence that the project has vibrant committer, adopter and		Clear evidence that the project has vibrant committer, adopter and | 
|  | user communities as appropriate for the type of Review.				user communities as appropriate for the type of Review. | 
|  | Reasonable diversity in its committer population as appropriate for		Reasonable diversity in its committer population as appropriate for | 
|  | the type of Review. Diversity status must be provided not only as		the type of Review. Diversity status must be provided not only as | 
|  | number of people/companies, but also in terms of effort provided by		number of people/companies, but also in terms of effort provided by | 
|  | those people/companies.								those people/companies. | 
|  | Documented completion of all required due diligence under the			Documented completion of all required due diligence under the | 
|  | Eclipse IP									Eclipse IP | 
|  | Policy.										Policy. | 
|  | For Continuation, Graduation and Release Reviews, the project must		For Continuation, Graduation and Release Reviews, the project must | 
|  | have a current project plan, in the format specified by the EMO,		have a current project plan, in the format specified by the EMO, | 
|  | available to the community.							available to the community. | 
|  | Balanced progress in creating both frameworks and extensible,			Balanced progress in creating both frameworks and extensible, | 
|  | exemplary tools.								exemplary tools. | 
|  | Showcase the project's quality through project-team chosen metrics		Showcase the project's quality through project-team chosen metrics | 
|  | and measures, e.g., coupling, cyclomatic complexity, test/code			and measures, e.g., coupling, cyclomatic complexity, test/code | 
|  | coverage, documentation of extensions points, etc.				coverage, documentation of extensions points, etc. | 
|  |  | 
|  | 2Until such time as the Foundation portal supports			  |	The Review period is open for no less than one week and usually no | 
|  | initiating Reviews, email to the <a href=				  |	more than two weeks of generally accepted business days. | 
|  | "mailto:emo@eclipse.org">EMO will suffice.				  | | 
|  | The Review itself:							  < | 
|  | < | 
|  | The Review is open for no less than one week and usually no more	  < | 
|  | than two weeks of generally accepted business days. This is the		  < | 
|  | Review period.								  < | 
|  | The Review begins with the EMO's posting of the review materials at		The Review begins with the EMO's posting of the review materials at | 
|  | the start of the Review period, and ends with either the end of the	  |	the start of the Review period | 
|  | Review period or (see below) an optional conference call or other	  < | 
|  | conference technology (e.g., web conferencing) so long as the		  < | 
|  | technology is available to all members and incurs no additional costs	  < | 
|  | to the attendees.							  < | 
|  | The proper functioning of the Eclipse Development Process is			The proper functioning of the Eclipse Development Process is | 
|  | contingent on the active participation of the Eclipse Members and		contingent on the active participation of the Eclipse Members and | 
|  | Committers, especially in Reviews, thus each Review has an			Committers, especially in Reviews, thus each Review has an | 
|  | EMO-designated discussion and feedback communication channel: a			EMO-designated discussion and feedback communication channel: a | 
|  | newgroup, a mailing list, or some other public forum.			  |	forum/newgroup, a mailing list, or some other public forum. | 
|  | If a Committer election is required for a Review (for example, for		If a Committer election is required for a Review (for example, for | 
|  | a Move Review), then it is held simultaneously with the Review period.	  |	a Creation Review), then it is | 
|  | Thus the election and the Review will end at the same time, allowing	  |	held simultaneously with the Review period. Thus the election and the | 
|  | quick and efficient provisioning of the resulting Project.		  |	Review will end at the same time, allowing quick and efficient | 
|  | Simultaneously with the opening of the Review, a date and time for	  |	provisioning of the resulting Project. | 
|  | the optional conference call is announced. The call date shall be no	  < | 
|  | less than the next day and no more than one week of standard business	  < | 
|  | days after the last day of the Review. (For example, if the Review run	  < | 
|  | from Wednesday the 4th through Tuesday the 10th, the call may be	  < | 
|  | previously scheduled for any time from Wednesday the 11th through	  < | 
|  | Wednesday the 18th.)							  < | 
|  | The default is that the optional conference call not be held. However,	  < | 
|  | during the Review period, any Eclipse Member with voting rights may	  < | 
|  | request, via the Review's public communication channel, that the	  < | 
|  | conference call be held. If any such requests exist at the end of the	  < | 
|  | Review period, the conference call is held at its previously scheduled	  < | 
|  | date and time.								  < | 
|  | During the conference call, the Project Leadership (or EMO		  < | 
|  | appointed Project representative) provides a brief summary of the	  < | 
|  | reasons and justifications for the phase transition followed by a	  < | 
|  | question and answer session.						  < | 
|  | The EMO(ED) approves or fails the Review based on the public			The EMO(ED) approves or fails the Review based on the public | 
|  | comments, the scope of the Project, and the Purposes of the Eclipse		comments, the scope of the Project, and the Purposes of the Eclipse | 
|  | Foundation as defined in the Bylaws. The EMO(ED) announces the result	  |	Foundation as defined in the Bylaws. | 
|  | in the defined Review communication channel.				  |	The Review ends with the announcement of the results in the defined | 
|  | >	Review communication channel (the EMO(ED) will request that the Projec | 
|  | >	Lead make this announcement). | 
|  |  | 
|  | If any Member believes that the EMO has acted incorrectly in			If any Member believes that the EMO has acted incorrectly in | 
|  | approving or failing a Review may appeal to the Board to review the		approving or failing a Review may appeal to the Board to review the | 
|  | EMO's decision.									EMO's decision. | 
|  | 6.3.1 Creation Review								6.3.1 Creation Review | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | See guidelines and								See guidelines and | 
|  | checklists about Creation Reviews.						checklists about Creation Reviews. | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | The purpose of the Creation Review is to assess the community and		The purpose of the Creation Review is to assess the community and | 
|  | membership response to the proposal, to verify that appropriate			membership response to the proposal, to verify that appropriate | 
|  | resources are available for the project to achieve its plan, and to		resources are available for the project to achieve its plan, and to | 
|  | serve as a committer election for the project's initial Committers. Th		serve as a committer election for the project's initial Committers. Th | 
|  | Eclipse Foundation strives not to be a repository of ''code dumps'' an	  |	Eclipse Foundation strives not to be a repository of "code dumps" and | 
|  | thus projects must be sufficiently staffed for forward progress.		thus projects must be sufficiently staffed for forward progress. | 
|  | The Creation Review archival documents must include short nomination	  |	The Creation Review documents must include short nomination bios of | 
|  | bios of the proposed initial committers. These bios should discuss	  |	the proposed initial committers. These bios should discuss their | 
|  | their relationship to, and history with, the incoming code and/or thei	  |	relationship to, and history with, the incoming code and/or their | 
|  | involvement with the area/technologies covered by the proposal. The		involvement with the area/technologies covered by the proposal. The | 
|  | goal is to help keep any legacy contributors connected to new project		goal is to help keep any legacy contributors connected to new project | 
|  | and explain that connection to the current and future Eclipse			and explain that connection to the current and future Eclipse | 
|  | membership, as well as justify the initial Committers' participation i		membership, as well as justify the initial Committers' participation i | 
|  | a meritocracy. (See [<a href=						  |	a meritocracy. | 
|  | "http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200610.mbo	  < | 
|  | 6.3.2 Graduation Review								6.3.2 Graduation Review | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | See guidelines and								See guidelines and | 
|  | checklists about Graduation Reviews.						checklists about Graduation Reviews. | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | The purpose of the Graduation Review is to confirm that the Project		The purpose of the Graduation Review is to confirm that the Project | 
|  | is/has:										is/has: | 
|  |  | 
|  | a working and demonstratable code base of sufficiently high		  |	a working and demonstrable code base of sufficiently high | 
|  | quality										quality | 
|  | active and sufficiently diverse communities appropriate to the size		active and sufficiently diverse communities appropriate to the size | 
|  | of the graduating code base: adopters, developers, and users			of the graduating code base: adopters, developers, and users | 
|  | operating fully in the open following the Principles and Purposes		operating fully in the open following the Principles and Purposes | 
|  | of Eclipse									of Eclipse | 
|  | a credit to Eclipse and is functioning well within the larger			a credit to Eclipse and is functioning well within the larger | 
|  | Eclipse community								Eclipse community | 
|  |  | 
|  | The Graduation Review is about the phase change from Incubation Phase	  |	The Graduation Review is about the phase change from Incubation | 
|  | to Mature Phase. If the Project and/or some of its code is		  |	Phase to Mature Phase. If the Project and/or some of its code is | 
|  | simultaneously relocating to another Project, the Graduation Review		simultaneously relocating to another Project, the Graduation Review | 
|  | will be combined with a Move Review.					  |	will be combined with a <a href= | 
|  | >	"#6_3_8_Restructuring_Review">Restructuring Review. | 
|  | 6.3.3 Release Review								6.3.3 Release Review | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | See guidelines and								See guidelines and | 
|  | checklists about Release Reviews.						checklists about Release Reviews. | 
|  | |	The purposes of a Release Review are: to summarize the | 
|  | |	accomplishments of the release, to verify that the IP Policy has been | 
|  | |	followed and all approvals have been received, to highlight any | 
|  | The purposes of a Release Review are: to summarize the accomplishments	  |	remaining quality and/or architectural issues, and to verify that the | 
|  | of the release, to verify that the IP Policy has been followed and all	  |	project is continuing to operate according to the Principles and | 
|  | approvals have been received, to highlight any remaining quality and/o	  |	Purposes of Eclipse. | 
|  | architectural issues, and to verify that the project is continuing to	  < | 
|  | operate according to the Princples and Purposes of Eclipse.		  < | 
|  | 6.3.4 Promotion Review								6.3.4 Promotion Review | 
|  | The purpose of a Promotion Review is to determine if the Project has		The purpose of a Promotion Review is to determine if the Project has | 
|  | demonstrated the characteristics of a Top-Level Project, e.g.,			demonstrated the characteristics of a Top-Level Project, e.g., | 
|  | consistent leadership in a technical area and the recruitment of a		consistent leadership in a technical area and the recruitment of a | 
|  | wider developer community. The Project will already be a			wider developer community. The Project will already be a | 
|  | well-functioning Mature Eclipse Project, so evidence to the contrary		well-functioning Mature Eclipse Project, so evidence to the contrary | 
|  | will be a negative for promotion. Top-Level Projects, both through		will be a negative for promotion. Top-Level Projects, both through | 
|  | their existance and their Council memberships, have substantial		  |	their existence and their Council memberships, have substantial | 
|  | influence over direction and operation of Eclipse, thus it behooves th		influence over direction and operation of Eclipse, thus it behooves th | 
|  | membership to grant Top-Level status only for merit: for demonstrated		membership to grant Top-Level status only for merit: for demonstrated | 
|  | service to the larger Eclipse eco-system.				  |	service to the larger Eclipse ecosystem. | 
|  | 6.3.5 Continuation								6.3.5 Continuation | 
|  | Review										Review | 
|  | The purpose of a Continuation Review is to verify that a Proposal or		The purpose of a Continuation Review is to verify that a Proposal or | 
|  | Project continues to be a viable effort and a credit to Eclipse. The		Project continues to be a viable effort and a credit to Eclipse. The | 
|  | Project team will be expected to explain the recent technical progress		Project team will be expected to explain the recent technical progress | 
|  | and to demonstrate sufficient adopter, developer, and user support for		and to demonstrate sufficient adopter, developer, and user support for | 
|  | the Project. The goal of the Continuation Review is to avoid having		the Project. The goal of the Continuation Review is to avoid having | 
|  | inactive projects looking promising but never actually delivering		inactive projects looking promising but never actually delivering | 
|  | extensible frameworks and exemplary tools to the ecosystem.			extensible frameworks and exemplary tools to the ecosystem. | 
|  | 6.3.6 Termination								6.3.6 Termination | 
|  | Review										Review | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | See <a href=									See <a href= | 
|  | "http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/HOWTO/Review_Informatio		"http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/HOWTO/Review_Informatio | 
|  | Termination Review "How To" for more information.				Termination Review "How To" for more information. | 
|  | |	The purpose of a Termination Review is to provide a final | 
|  | |	opportunity for the Committers and/or Eclipse membership to discuss th | 
|  | |	proposed withdrawal of a Proposal or archiving of a Project. The | 
|  | The purpose of a Termination Review is to provide a final opportunity	  |	desired outcome is to find sufficient evidence of renewed interest and | 
|  | for the Committers and/or Eclipse membership to discuss the proposed	  |	resources in keeping the Project or Proposal active. | 
|  | withdrawl of a Proposal or archiving of a Project. The desired outcome	  < | 
|  | is to find sufficient evidence of renewed interest and resources in	  < | 
|  | keeping the Project or Proposal active.					  < | 
|  | 6.3.7 Move Review								6.3.7 Move Review | 
|  | |	A Move Review is considered to be a special type of <a href= | 
|  | |	"#6_3_8_Restructuring_Review">Restructuring Review. | 
|  | < | 
|  | See <a href=								  < | 
|  | "http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/HOWTO/Review_Informatio	  < | 
|  | Move Review "How To" for more information about Move Reviews.		  < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | < | 
|  | The purpose of a Move Review is to verify that there are no IP Legal	  < | 
|  | impediments to the proposed move of code from one Project to another	  < | 
|  | Project, and to act as an election (if necessary) for the Committers	  < | 
|  | who are being added to the new Project.					  < | 
|  | There are four Move Review cases:					  < | 
|  | < | 
|  | A subset of code is moving out of one Project (A) and into another	  < | 
|  | Project (B). -- Project B's Committers may not have new committers	  < | 
|  | imposed upon them, thus project B's Committers must elect (the subset	  < | 
|  | of) Project A's Committers who are moving with the code to Project	  < | 
|  | B.3									  < | 
|  | An entire Project's (A) code is moving into another Project (B) and	  < | 
|  | Project A is being terminated. -- Same as above: Project B's Committer	  < | 
|  | must elect Project A's Committers to committer status on Project	  < | 
|  | B.									  < | 
|  | An entire Project (A) is moving from one parent Project (P) to		  < | 
|  | another parent Project (Q). -- No Committers are changing Operating	  < | 
|  | Projects, thus no elections are necessary.				  < | 
|  | Code is moving out of one Project (A) and starting a new Project	  < | 
|  | (C). -- This is a Creation Review, not a Move Review. Project C		  < | 
|  | committers will be defined by the Creation Review.			  < | 
|  | < | 
|  | 3Until such time as the Foundation portal supports			  < | 
|  | Committer election-style voting for Move Reviews, an election held on	  < | 
|  | the destination Project's developer mailing list will suffice.		  < | 
|  | 6.3.8 Restructuring								6.3.8 Restructuring | 
|  | Review										Review | 
|  | The purpose of a Restructuring Review is to verify that there are no I	  | | 
|  | Legal impediments to the proposed restructuring, and to allow the	  |	This iteration of the document provides more detail on Restructuring | 
|  | community a chance to comment on that restructuring. Restructuring may	  |	Reviews. It also considers a Move Review (as defined by the <a href= | 
|  | involve splitting an existing Project into multiple Projects (typicall	  |	"#6_3_7_Move_Review">previous version of this document) to be a | 
|  | one Operating Project into a Container Project with multiple new	  |	special type of a Restructuring Review. | 
|  | Operating Sub-Projects) and/or combining existing Projects into fewer	  |	This version of the document makes explicit a loophole that permits | 
|  | Projects (typically multiple Operating Projects into a single Operatin	  |	the creation of new projects without engaging in the full | 
|  | Project).								  |	proposal/creation process. This applies only to new project with a | 
|  | If a Restructuring Review involves combining two or more Committer	  |	scope that is a subset of the original project's scope. There is no | 
|  | populations, each Committer population must elect the			  |	explicit requirement that a project become a parent to the new | 
|  | other3, in order to explicitly maintain the principle of not		  |	projects. New projects can be created as siblings or elsewhere in the | 
|  | allowing any Committer population to have new Committers imposed there	  |	project hierarchy. In the event that a restructuring review results in | 
|  | upon.									  |	unrelated projects, it is expected that the scope of the original | 
|  | >	project will be adjusted accordingly. | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	The purpose of a Restructuring Review is to notify the community of | 
|  | >	your intent to make significant changes to one or more projects. | 
|  | >	"Significant changes" includes: | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	Movement of significant chunks of functionality from one project to | 
|  | >	another; | 
|  | >	Modification of the project structure, e.g. combining multiple | 
|  | >	projects into a single project, or decomposing a single project into | 
|  | >	multiple projects; and/or | 
|  | >	Change of project scope. | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	A Restructuring Review may include the movement of significant | 
|  | >	chunks of code. A move is considered significant if it has an impact o | 
|  | >	the community (i.e. if segments of the community will notice that the | 
|  | >	code has moved). This may include entire projects, bundles, and | 
|  | >	features, but likely excludes small fragments, code snippets and | 
|  | >	individual files. The IP Log of all moved code must be reviewed prior | 
|  | >	to the start of the review period (this, typically, is a subset of the | 
|  | >	project's IP Log). If all of the code is moved out of a project, a | 
|  | >	Termination Review for that project can be combined with the | 
|  | >	Restructuring Review. | 
|  | >	Note that, regardless of whether or not a review is required, moving | 
|  | >	code from one Project to another is subject to the <a href= | 
|  | >	"/org/documents/Eclipse_IP_Policy.pdf">Eclipse IP Policy. | 
|  | >	A Restructuring Review may necessitate the construction of one or | 
|  | >	more new projects. This tends to occur when an existing project is | 
|  | >	decomposed into two or more projects. In this case, a Restructuring | 
|  | >	Review is similar to a Creation Review. Any new projects that are | 
|  | >	created as part of a Restructuring Review must have their scope | 
|  | >	explicitly specified as part of the review. The scope of any new | 
|  | >	project must be a subset of the scope of the original project. | 
|  | >	Likewise, the set of committers assigned to a new project must be a | 
|  | >	subset of the committers of the original project (additional committer | 
|  | >	can be elected to the new project after it is created). Any new | 
|  | >	projects that fall outside of the scope of the original project, or | 
|  | >	wish to establish a different set of committers, must undergo the full | 
|  | >	project creation process. | 
|  | >	Committers can be moved along with code into a new project as part | 
|  | >	of the project provisioning process. Committers cannot be moved along | 
|  | >	with code into an existing project. In this case, the existing project | 
|  | >	must elect the new committers into the project. | 
|  | >	A project is expected to socialize pending changes using established | 
|  | >	communication channels prior to initiating the review. A Restructuring | 
|  | >	Review must provide the community with at least one week to review and | 
|  | >	respond to the changes. Prior to the start of that review period, the | 
|  | >	community must be provided with (via the EMO) completed review | 
|  | >	documentation that describes in specific terms what will be changed as | 
|  | >	part of the restructuring. | 
|  | >	This may include: | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	Name, description, scope, and committer lists of new projects that | 
|  | >	need to be created; | 
|  | >	Source and target locations for moves of source code | 
|  | >	directories; | 
|  | >	Reorganization of builds and downloads; | 
|  | >	Contribution questionnaires (CQs) that need to be moved or | 
|  | >	piggy-back CQs that must be created; | 
|  | >	Location of the approved IP Log; and | 
|  | >	Other information that helps the community understand the | 
|  | >	change. | 
|  | > | 
|  | 6.3.9 Combining Reviews								6.3.9 Combining Reviews | 
|  | Multiple Reviews may occur simultaneous for a given Project. The most	  | | 
|  | common combinations include Move+Release and Move+Graduation and	  |	This section has been modified to explicitly allow multiple projects | 
|  | Graduation+Release.							  |	to participate in a single. It is possible, for example, for a project | 
|  | >	and its descendants to engage in a simultaneous Release Review. | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	Reviews can be combined at the discretion of the PMC and EMO. | 
|  | >	Multiple Projects may participate in a single Review. Similarly, | 
|  | >	multiple review types can be engaged in simultaneously. A parent | 
|  | >	Project may, for example, engage in an aggregated Release Review | 
|  | >	involving itself and some or all of its child projects; a consolidated | 
|  | >	Restructuring Review may move the code for several projects; or a | 
|  | >	Release Review may be combined with a Graduation Review. When multiple | 
|  | >	reviews are combined, the review documentation must explicitly state | 
|  | >	all of the Projects and types of reviews involved, and include the | 
|  | >	required information about each. | 
|  | >	It should be noted that the purpose of combining reviews is to | 
|  | >	better serve the community, rather than to reduce effort on the part o | 
|  | >	the project (though it is fortunate when it does both). Combining a | 
|  | >	Release and Graduation review, or aggregating a Release Review of a | 
|  | >	Project and several of it's child Projects generally makes sense. | 
|  | >	Combining Release Reviews for multiple unrelated projects most likely | 
|  | >	does not. | 
|  | 6.4 Releases									6.4 Releases | 
|  | (Most of this section is borrowed and paraphrased from the			(Most of this section is borrowed and paraphrased from the | 
|  | excellent Apache								excellent Apache | 
|  | Software Foundation Releases FAQ. The Eclipse community has many of		Software Foundation Releases FAQ. The Eclipse community has many of | 
|  | the same beliefs about Releases as does the Apache community and their		the same beliefs about Releases as does the Apache community and their | 
|  | words were already excellent. The Apache Software Foundation Releases		words were already excellent. The Apache Software Foundation Releases | 
|  | FAQ is distributed under the <a href=						FAQ is distributed under the <a href= | 
|  | "http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0">Apache License, Version		"http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0">Apache License, Version | 
|  | 2.0.)										2.0.) | 
|  | Releases are, by definition, anything that is distributed outside of		Releases are, by definition, anything that is distributed outside of | 
|  | the Committers of a Project. If users are being directed to download a		the Committers of a Project. If users are being directed to download a | 
|  | build, then that build has been released (modulo the exceptions below)		build, then that build has been released (modulo the exceptions below) | 
|  | All Projects and Committers must obey the Eclipse Foundation			All Projects and Committers must obey the Eclipse Foundation | 
|  | requirements on approving any release.						requirements on approving any release. | 
|  | (Exception 1: nightly and integration builds) During the			(Exception 1: nightly and integration builds) During the | 
|  | process of developing software and preparing a Release, various nightl		process of developing software and preparing a Release, various nightl | 
|  | and integration builds are made available to the developer community		and integration builds are made available to the developer community | 
|  | for testing purposes. Do not include any links on the project website,		for testing purposes. Do not include any links on the project website, | 
|  | blogs, wikis, etc. that might encourage non-early-adopters to download		blogs, wikis, etc. that might encourage non-early-adopters to download | 
|  | and use nightly builds, release candidates, or any other similar		and use nightly builds, release candidates, or any other similar | 
|  | package (links aimed at early-adopters and the project's developers ar		package (links aimed at early-adopters and the project's developers ar | 
|  | both permitted and encouaged). The only people who are supposed to kno	  |	both permitted and encouraged). The only people who are supposed to | 
|  | about such packages are the people following the developer mailing lis	  |	know about such packages are the people following the developer mailin | 
|  | and thus are aware of the limitations of such builds.			  |	list and thus are aware of the limitations of such builds. | 
|  | (Exception 2: milestone and release candidate builds)				(Exception 2: milestone and release candidate builds) | 
|  | Projects are encouraged to use an agile development process including		Projects are encouraged to use an agile development process including | 
|  | regular milestones (for example, six week milestones). Milestones and		regular milestones (for example, six week milestones). Milestones and | 
|  | release candidates are "almost releases" intended for adoption and		release candidates are "almost releases" intended for adoption and | 
|  | testing by early adopters. Projects are allowed to have links on the		testing by early adopters. Projects are allowed to have links on the | 
|  | project website, blogs, wikis, etc. to encourage these				project website, blogs, wikis, etc. to encourage these | 
|  | outside-the-committer-circle early adopters to download and test the		outside-the-committer-circle early adopters to download and test the | 
|  | milestones and release candidates, but such communications must includ		milestones and release candidates, but such communications must includ | 
|  | caveats explaining that these are not official Releases.			caveats explaining that these are not official Releases. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Milestones are to be labeled x.yMz, e.g., 2.3M1					Milestones are to be labeled x.yMz, e.g., 2.3M1 | 
|  | (milestone 1 towards version 2.3), 2.3M2 (milestone 2 towards version		(milestone 1 towards version 2.3), 2.3M2 (milestone 2 towards version | 
|  | 2.3), etc.									2.3), etc. | 
|  | Release candidates are to be labeled x.yRCz, e.g.,				Release candidates are to be labeled x.yRCz, e.g., | 
|  | 2.3RC1 (release candidate 1 towards version 2.3).				2.3RC1 (release candidate 1 towards version 2.3). | 
|  | Official Releases are the only downloads allowed to be labeled with		Official Releases are the only downloads allowed to be labeled with | 
|  | x.y, e.g., 0.5, 1.0, 2.3, etc.							x.y, e.g., 0.5, 1.0, 2.3, etc. | 
|  |  | 
|  | All official Releases must have a successful Release Review before	  |	All official Releases must have a successful <a href= | 
|  | being made available for download.					  |	"#6_3_3_Release_Review">Release Review before being made available | 
|  | >	for download. | 
|  | (Exception 3: bug fix releases with no new features) Bug			(Exception 3: bug fix releases with no new features) Bug | 
|  | fix releases (x.y.z, e.g., 2.3.1) with no new features over the base		fix releases (x.y.z, e.g., 2.3.1) with no new features over the base | 
|  | release (e.g., 2.3) are allowed to be released without an additional		release (e.g., 2.3) are allowed to be released without an additional | 
|  | Release Review. If a bug fix release contains new features, then the		Release Review. If a bug fix release contains new features, then the | 
|  | Project must have a full Release Review.					Project must have a full Release Review. | 
|  | Under no circumstances are builds and milestones to be used as a		Under no circumstances are builds and milestones to be used as a | 
|  | substitute for doing proper official Releases. Proper Release			substitute for doing proper official Releases. Proper Release | 
|  | management and reviews is a key aspect of Eclipse Quality.			management and reviews is a key aspect of Eclipse Quality. | 
|  | 6.5 Grievance Handling								6.5 Grievance Handling | 
|  | When a Member has a concern about a Project, the Member will raise tha	  |	When a Member has a concern about a Project, the Member will raise | 
|  | concern with the Project's Leadership. If the Member is not satisfied	  |	that concern with the Project's Leadership. If the Member is not | 
|  | with the result, the Member can raise the concern with the parent	  |	satisfied with the result, the Member can raise the concern with the | 
|  | Project's Leadership. The Member can continue appeals up the Project	  |	parent Project's Leadership. The Member can continue appeals up the | 
|  | Leadership Chain and, if still not satisfied, thence to the EMO, then	  |	Project Leadership Chain and, if still not satisfied, thence to the | 
|  | the Executive Director, and finally to the Board. All appeals and	  |	EMO, then the Executive Director, and finally to the Board. All appeal | 
|  | discussions will abide by the Guiding Principles of being open,		  |	and discussions will abide by the Guiding Principles of being open, | 
|  | transparent, and public.							transparent, and public. | 
|  | Member concerns may include:							Member concerns may include: | 
|  |  | 
|  | Out of Scope. It is alleged that a Project is exceeding its			Out of Scope. It is alleged that a Project is exceeding its | 
|  | approved scope.									approved scope. | 
|  | Inconsistent with Purposes. It is alleged that a Project is			Inconsistent with Purposes. It is alleged that a Project is | 
|  | inconsistent with the Roadmap and/or Purposes.					inconsistent with the Roadmap and/or Purposes. | 
|  | Dysfunctional. It is alleged that a Project is not				Dysfunctional. It is alleged that a Project is not | 
|  | functioning correctly or is in violation of one or more requirements o		functioning correctly or is in violation of one or more requirements o | 
|  | the Development Process.							the Development Process. | 
|  | Contributor Appeal. It is alleged that a Contributor who			Contributor Appeal. It is alleged that a Contributor who | 
|  | desires to be a Committer is not being treated fairly.				desires to be a Committer is not being treated fairly. | 
|  | Invalid Veto. It is alleged that a -1 vote on a Review is			Invalid Veto. It is alleged that a -1 vote on a Review is | 
|  | not in the interests of the Project and/or of Eclipse.				not in the interests of the Project and/or of Eclipse. | 
|  |  | 
|  | A variety of grievance resolutions are available to the EMO up to, and	  |	A variety of grievance resolutions are available to the EMO up to, | 
|  | including, rebooting or restarting a project with new Committers and	  |	and including, rebooting or restarting a project with new Committers | 
|  | leadership.								  |	and leadership. | 
|  | 7. Precedence									7. Precedence | 
|  | In the event of a conflict between this document and a Board-approved	  |	In the event of a conflict between this document and a | 
|  | project charter, the most recently approved document will take		  |	Board-approved project charter, the most recently approved document | 
|  | precedence.								  |	will take precedence. | 
|  | 8. Revisions									8. Revisions | 
|  | As specified in the Bylaws, the EMO is responsible for maintaining thi	  |	As specified in the Bylaws, the EMO is responsible for maintaining | 
|  | document and all changes must be approved by the Board.			  |	this document and all changes must be approved by the Board. | 
|  | Due to the continued evolution of the Eclipse technology, the			Due to the continued evolution of the Eclipse technology, the | 
|  | Eclipse community, and the software marketplace, it is expected that		Eclipse community, and the software marketplace, it is expected that | 
|  | the Development Process (this document) will be reviewed and revised o		the Development Process (this document) will be reviewed and revised o | 
|  | at least an annual basis. The timeline for that review should be chose		at least an annual basis. The timeline for that review should be chose | 
|  | so as to incorporate the lessons of the previous annual coordinate		so as to incorporate the lessons of the previous annual coordinate | 
|  | release and to be applied to the next annual coordinated release.		release and to be applied to the next annual coordinated release. | 
|  | The EMO is further responsible for ensuring that all plans,			The EMO is further responsible for ensuring that all plans, | 
|  | documents and reports produced in accordance with this Development		documents and reports produced in accordance with this Development | 
|  | Process be made available to the Membership at Large via an appropriat		Process be made available to the Membership at Large via an appropriat | 
|  | mechanism in a timely, effective manner.					mechanism in a timely, effective manner. | 
|  | 8.1 Revision 2.4							  |	8.1 Revision 2.5 | 
|  | This document was approved by the Eclipse Foundation Board of Director	  |	This document was approved by the Eclipse Foundation Board of | 
|  | in its meeting on August 20, 2008. It replaces all previous versions.	  |	Directors in its meeting on May 19/2010. It takes effect (replacing al | 
|  |  									  |	previous versions) on August 1/2010. | 
|  | > | 
|  | > | 
|  | > | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	See also | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	PDF version of this | 
|  | >	document | 
|  | >	Previous version of this document | 
|  | >	Changes made since the previous version of this | 
|  | >	document | 
|  | > | 
|  | >	This document with | 
|  | >	comments | 
|  | >	' ?> | 
|  | > | 
|  | > | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  |  |