|  | <?php  																														require_once($_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] . "/eclipse.org-common/system/app.class.php");	require_once($_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] . "/eclipse.org-common/system/nav.class.php"); 	require_once($_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] . "/eclipse.org-common/system/menu.class.php"); 	$App 	= new App();	$Nav	= new Nav();	$Menu 	= new Menu();		include($App->getProjectCommon());    # All on the same line to unclutter the user's desktop' | 
|  | /* 221934 - this page to remain on eclipse.org */ | 
|  |  | 
|  | $pageTitle 		= "Eclipse Development Process"; | 
|  |  | 
|  | include( '../_commonLeftNav.php' ); | 
|  |  | 
|  | $previous = "/projects/dev_process/development_process_2008.php"; | 
|  | $next = "/projects/dev_process/development_process_2011.php"; | 
|  |  | 
|  | $diff = "development_process_2010_diff.txt"; | 
|  |  | 
|  | $commentary = isset($_GET['commentary']); | 
|  |  | 
|  | ob_start(); | 
|  | ?> | 
|  | <style> | 
|  | p { | 
|  | margin-bottom:10px; | 
|  | } | 
|  | blockquote { | 
|  | margin-left:2em; | 
|  | margin-right:2em; | 
|  | margin-bottom:10px; | 
|  | } | 
|  | .comment { | 
|  | background-image:url(http://dev.eclipse.org/small_icons/apps/help-browser.png); | 
|  | background-position: 5px 5px; | 
|  | background-repeat:no-repeat; | 
|  | display:<?= $commentary ? 'block' : 'none'?>; | 
|  | float: right; | 
|  | width:200px; | 
|  | margin: 5px; | 
|  | padding: 25px 2px 2px 2px; | 
|  | border: 1px solid black; | 
|  | background-color: #EEEEEE; | 
|  | } | 
|  | .comment p { | 
|  | margin:3px; | 
|  | } | 
|  | .postit { | 
|  | float: right; | 
|  | width:150px; | 
|  | margin: 5px; | 
|  | padding: 2px; | 
|  | border: 1px dashed black; | 
|  | background-color: #FFFFDD; | 
|  | } | 
|  | #toc { | 
|  | padding: 5px; | 
|  | } | 
|  | #toc ul { | 
|  | list-style-type: none; | 
|  | list-style-image: none; | 
|  | margin-top: 1px; | 
|  | margin-bottom: 1px; | 
|  | padding-top: 1px; | 
|  | padding-bottom: 1px; | 
|  | text-align: left; | 
|  | } | 
|  | #toc li{ | 
|  | margin-top: 1px; | 
|  | margin-bottom: 1px; | 
|  | padding-top: 0; | 
|  | } | 
|  | </style> | 
|  | <div id="maincontent"> | 
|  | <div id="midcolumn"> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h1>Eclipse Development Process</h1> | 
|  | <div class="homeitem3col"> | 
|  | <h2>Contents</h2> | 
|  | <div id="toc"> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li><a href="#1_Purpose">1 Purpose</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#2_Principles">2 Principles</a> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li><a href="#2_1_Open_Source_Rules_of_Engagement">2.1 Open Source Rules of Engagement</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#2_2_Eclipse_Ecosystem">2.2 Eclipse Ecosystem</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#2_3_Three_Communities">2.3 Three Communities</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#2_4_Clear_Concise_and_Evolving">2.4 Clear, Concise, and Evolving</a></li> | 
|  | </ul></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#3_Requirements">3 Requirements</a> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li><a href="#3_1_Requirements_and_Guidelines">3.1 Requirements and Guidelines</a></li> | 
|  | </ul></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_Structure_and_Organization">4 Project Structure and Organization</a> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_1_Committers">4.1 Committers</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_2_Code_and_Releases">4.2 Code and Releases</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_3_IP_Records">4.3 IP Records</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_4_Community_Awareness">4.4 Community Awareness</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_5_Scope">4.5 Scope</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_6_Leaders">4.6 Leaders</a> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_6_1_PMC">4.6.1 Project Management Committee (PMC)</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_6_2_PL">4.6.2 Project Lead(s)</a></li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | </li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_7_Committers_and_Contributors">4.7 Committers and Contributors</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_8_Councils">4.8 Councils</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_9_Incubators">4.9 Incubator Projects</a></li> | 
|  | </ul></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#5_Roadmap_Process">5 Roadmap Process</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_Development_Process">6 Development Process</a> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_1_Mentors">6.1 Mentors</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_2_Project_Lifecycle">6.2 Project Lifecycle</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_2_1_Pre-Proposal">6.2.1 Pre-proposal</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_2_2_Proposal">6.2.2 Proposal</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_2_3_Incubation">6.2.3 Incubation</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_2_4_Mature">6.2.4 Mature</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_2_5_Top-Level">6.2.5 Top-Level</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_2_6_Archived">6.2.6 Archived </a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_3_Reviews">6.3 Reviews</a> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_3_1_Creation_Review">6.3.1 Creation Review</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_3_2_Graduation_Review">6.3.2 Graduation Review</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_3_3_Release_Review">6.3.3 Release Review</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_3_4_Promotion_Review">6.3.4 Promotion Review</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_3_5_Continuation_Review">6.3.5 Continuation Review</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_3_6_Termination_Review">6.3.6 Termination Review</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_3_7_Move_Review">6.3.7 Move Review</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_3_8_Restructuring_Review">6.3.8 Restructuring Review</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_3_9_Combining_Reviews">6.3.9 Combining Reviews</a></li> | 
|  | </ul></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_4_Releases">6.4 Releases</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_5_Grievance_Handling">6.5 Grievance Handling</a></li> | 
|  | </ul></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#7_Precedence">7 Precedence</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#8_Revisions">8 Revisions</a> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li><a href="#8_1_Revision">8.1 Revision 2.4</a></li> | 
|  | </ul></li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | </div> | 
|  | </div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h2><a name="1_Purpose"></a>1. Purpose</h2> | 
|  | <p>This document describes the Development Process for the Eclipse Foundation. In | 
|  | particular, it describes how the Membership at Large, the Board of Directors, other | 
|  | constituents of the Ecosystem, and the Eclipse Management Organization (EMO) lead, | 
|  | influence, and collaborate with Eclipse Projects to achieve these Eclipse purposes:</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <blockquote><em>The Eclipse technology is a vendor-neutral, open development platform supplying | 
|  | frameworks and exemplary, extensible tools (the 'Eclipse Platform').  Eclipse Platform tools | 
|  | are exemplary in that they verify the utility of the Eclipse frameworks, illustrate the | 
|  | appropriate use of those frameworks, and support the development and maintenance of | 
|  | the Eclipse Platform itself; Eclipse Platform tools are extensible in that their | 
|  | functionality is accessible via documented programmatic interfaces.  The purpose | 
|  | of Eclipse Foundation Inc., is to advance the creation, | 
|  | evolution, promotion, and support of the Eclipse Platform and to cultivate both an | 
|  | open source community and an ecosystem of complementary products, capabilities, and services.</em></blockquote> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <div class="postit"><p>Explanatory comments, guidelines, | 
|  | and checklists - as well as additional requirements added by the EMO per <a href="#3_Requirements">section 3</a> - are noted | 
|  | in yellow boxes.</p></div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>This document has five sections:</p> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li><a href="#2_Principles"><em>Principles</em></a> outlines the basic principles upon which the development process is based.</li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#3_Requirements"><em>Requirements</em></a> describes the requirements that the Eclipse community has for its development process.</li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#4_Structure_and_Organization"><em>Structure and Organization</em></a> specifies the structure and organization of the projects and project community at Eclipse.</li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#5_Roadmap_Process"><em>Roadmap Process</em></a> describes the manner by which the EMO will work with the projects to create the annual Eclipse Roadmap.</li> | 
|  | <li><a href="#6_Development_Process"><em>Development Process</em></a> outlines the lifecycle and processes required of all Eclipse projects.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h2><a name="2_Principles"></a>2. Principles</h2> | 
|  | <p>The following describes the guiding principles used in developing this Development Process.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="2_1_Open_Source_Rules_of_Engagement"></a>2.1 Open Source Rules of Engagement</h3> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li> <b>Open</b> - Eclipse is open to all; Eclipse provides the same opportunity | 
|  | to all. Everyone participates with the same rules; there are no rules to exclude | 
|  | any potential contributors which include, of course, direct competitors in the marketplace.</li> | 
|  | <li> <b>Transparent</b> - Project discussions, minutes, deliberations, project plans, | 
|  | plans for new features, and other artifacts are open, public, and easily accessible.</li> | 
|  | <li> <b>Meritocracy</b> - Eclipse is a meritocracy. The more you contribute the more | 
|  | responsibility you will earn. Leadership roles in Eclipse are also merit-based and | 
|  | earned by peer acclaim.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="2_2_Eclipse_Ecosystem"></a>2.2 Eclipse Ecosystem</h3> | 
|  | <p>Eclipse as a brand is the sum of its parts (all of the Projects), and Projects | 
|  | should strive for the highest possible quality in extensible frameworks, | 
|  | exemplary tools, transparent processes, and project openness.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The Eclipse Foundation has the responsibility | 
|  | to <em>...cultivate...an ecosystem of complementary products, capabilities, and services...</em>. | 
|  | It is therefore a key | 
|  | principle that the Eclipse Development Process ensures that the projects are managed for the | 
|  | benefit of both the open source community and the ecosystem members. | 
|  | To this end, all Eclipse projects are required to:</p> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li> communicate their project plans and plans for new features (major and minor) in a timely, open and transparent manner;</li> | 
|  | <li> create platform quality frameworks capable of supporting the building of commercial grade products on top of them;</li> | 
|  | <li> ship extensible, exemplary tools which help enable a broad community of users; and</li> | 
|  | <li> participate in the annual Roadmap process to ensure maximum transparency and bi-directional communication with the ecosystem.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="2_3_Three_Communities"></a>2.3 Three Communities</h3> | 
|  | <p>Essential to the Purposes of the Eclipse Foundation is the development of three | 
|  | inter-related communities around each Project:</p> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li> <b>Contributors</b> and <b>Committers</b> - a thriving, diverse and active community | 
|  | of developers is the key component of any Eclipse Project. Ideally, this | 
|  | community should be an open, transparent, inclusive, and diverse community | 
|  | of Committers and (non-Committer) Contributors. Attracting new Contributors and | 
|  | Committers to an open source project is time consuming and requires active | 
|  | recruiting, not just passive "openness". The Project Leadership must make reasonable | 
|  | efforts to encourage and nurture promising new Contributors. | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li> Projects must have diversity goals to ensure diversity of thought and avoid | 
|  | relying on any one company or organization. At the same time, we acknowledge | 
|  | that enforcing a particular diversity metric is a poor way to achieve these goals; | 
|  | rather we expect the project leadership to help the diversity evolve organically.</li> | 
|  | <li> Diversity is a means to an end, not an end in itself, thus diversity goals | 
|  | will differ by project based on the other accomplishments of the project(s).</li> | 
|  | <li> Projects are required to explain their diversity efforts and accomplishments during Reviews.</li> | 
|  | </ul></li> | 
|  | <li> <b>Users</b> - an active and engaged user community is proof-positive that | 
|  | the Project's exemplary tools are useful and needed. Furthermore, a large | 
|  | user community is one of the key factors in creating a viable | 
|  | ecosystem around an Eclipse project, thus encouraging additional open source and | 
|  | commercial organizations to participate. Like all good things, a user community | 
|  | takes time and effort to bring to fruition, but once established is | 
|  | typically self-sustaining.</li> | 
|  | <li> <b>Adopters</b> - an active and engaged adopter/plug-in developer community | 
|  | is the | 
|  | only way to prove that an Eclipse project is providing extensible frameworks | 
|  | and extensible tools accessible via documented APIs. Reuse of the frameworks | 
|  | within the companies that are contributing to the project is necessary, but | 
|  | not sufficient to demonstrate an adopter community. Again, creating, encouraging, | 
|  | and nurturing an adopter community outside of the Project's developers takes time, | 
|  | energy, and creativity by the Project Leadership, but is essential | 
|  | to the Project's long-term open source success.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | <p>The Eclipse community considers the absence of any one or more of these | 
|  | communities as proof that the Project is not sufficiently open, transparent, | 
|  | and inviting, and/or that it has emphasized tools at the expense of | 
|  | extensible frameworks or vice versa.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="2_4_Clear_Concise_and_Evolving"></a>2.4 Clear, Concise, and Evolving</h3> | 
|  | <p>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 complexities, | 
|  | avoid the pitfalls, and become successful as quickly as possible.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | This document imposes requirements and constraints on the operation of the | 
|  | Projects, and it does so on behalf of the larger Eclipse community. It is | 
|  | an explicit goal of the Development Process to provide as much freedom | 
|  | and autonomy to the Projects as possible while ensuring the collective | 
|  | qualities benefit the entire Eclipse community.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Similarly, this document should not place undue constraints on the EMO or the Board | 
|  | that prevent them from governing the process as necessary.  We cannot foresee all | 
|  | circumstances and as such should be cautious of being overly prescriptive and/or | 
|  | requiring certain fixed metrics.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The frameworks, tools, projects, processes, community, and even the | 
|  | definition of Quality continues to, and will continue to, evolve. Creating rules | 
|  | or processes that force a static snapshot of any of these is detrimental to the | 
|  | health, growth, and ecosystem impact of Eclipse.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Part of the strength of this document is in what it does not say, and | 
|  | thus opens for community definition through convention, guidelines, and public consultation. | 
|  | A document with too much structure becomes too rigid and prevents the kind of | 
|  | innovation and change we desire for Eclipse. In areas where this document is | 
|  | vague, we expect the Projects and Members to engage the community-at-large | 
|  | to clarify the current norms and expectations.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h2><a name="3_Requirements"></a>3. Requirements</h2> | 
|  | <p>This document and any additional criteria as established by the EMO contains requirements, recommendations, and suggestions.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | <span style="margin-right:6px; margin-top:5px; float:left; color:ivory; background:#FF9999; | 
|  | border:1px solid #444; font-size:30px; line-height:25px; padding-top:2px; | 
|  | padding-left:2px; padding-right:2px; font-family:times; ">R</span><b>Required</b> - Certain responsibilities and behaviors | 
|  | are required of participants in Eclipse open source projects. Projects that fail to | 
|  | perform the required behaviors will be terminated by the EMO. In keeping with the | 
|  | Guiding Principles, the number of requirements must be kept to an absolute minimum.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | <span style="margin-right:6px; margin-top:5px; float:left; color:ivory; background:#00CC99; | 
|  | border:1px solid #444; font-size:30px; line-height:25px; padding-top:2px; padding-left:2px; | 
|  | padding-right:2px; font-family:times; ">G</span><b>Guideline</b> - Other responsibilities | 
|  | and behaviors are recommended best practices. Collectively, we have learned that Projects | 
|  | are more likely to be successful if the team members and leaders follow these recommendations. | 
|  | Projects are strongly encouraged to follow these recommendations, but will not be penalized by | 
|  | this Process if they do not.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="3_1_Requirements_and_Guidelines"></a>3.1 Requirements and Guidelines</h3> | 
|  | <p>This document is entirely composed of requirements. In addition to the requirements specified | 
|  | in this Development Process, the EMO is instructed to clarify, expand, and extend this Process | 
|  | by creating a set of Eclipse Project Development Guidelines to advance the creation, evolution, | 
|  | promotion, and support of the Eclipse Platform and to cultivate both an open source community | 
|  | and an ecosystem of complementary products and services. </p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The EMO is not permitted to override or ignore the requirements listed in this document | 
|  | without the express written endorsement of the Board of Directors.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h2><a name="4_Structure_and_Organization"></a>4. Project Structure and Organization</h2> | 
|  | <div class="comment"> | 
|  | <p>This version of the document adds the word "Project" to the title | 
|  | of this section to better qualify that it discusses the structure and organization | 
|  | of projects. The <a href="<?= $previous ?>#4_Structure_and_Organization">previous version</a> of this | 
|  | document defined notions of "Operating" and | 
|  | "Container" Projects. These notions have been abandoned | 
|  | in favour of a more generalized notion of Project. Under this new | 
|  | structure, projects can opt to function as Operating Projects by | 
|  | choosing not to maintain a code repository.</p> | 
|  | <p>See <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=301065">Bug 301065</a>.</p></div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>A <b>Project</b> 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 helps developers expose their | 
|  | hard work to a broad audience of consumers.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>Eclipse Projects are organized hierarchically. A special type of Project, <b>Top-Level Projects</b>, | 
|  | 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 <b>Sub-Project</b>. 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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The <b>descendants</b> of a Project are the Project itself and transitive closure of its child Projects. | 
|  | The <b>top parent</b> of a Project is the Top-Level Project at the top of the hierarchy.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Projects are the unit entity for:</p> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li>Committers</li> | 
|  | <li>Code and Releases</li> | 
|  | <li>IP Records</li> | 
|  | <li>Community Awareness</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | As defined by the <a href="/org/documents/Eclipse%20BYLAWS%202003_11_10%20Final.pdf#page=19">Eclipse Bylaws - Article VII</a>, | 
|  | the <b>Eclipse Management Organization (EMO)</b> consists of the Foundation staff and the Councils. The | 
|  | term <b>EMO(ED)</b>, when discussing an approval process, refers to the subset of the EMO | 
|  | consisting of the Executive Director and whomever he or she may delegate that specific approval authority to.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="4_1_Committers"></a>4.1 Committers</h3> | 
|  | <div class="comment"> | 
|  | <p>The  <a href="<?= $previous ?>#4_1_Committers">previous version</a> of this | 
|  | document introduced a notion of a "union" of committers that was never fully | 
|  | defined or utilized. That notion has been removed.</p> | 
|  | <p>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.</p></div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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</a>) into | 
|  | two or more Sub-Projects.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>There is no roll-up of committers: the set of committers on a 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-project does not give you any automatic rights on the "parent" project). | 
|  | </p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <img src="images/subprojects-resources-291x300.png"/> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="4_2_Code_and_Releases"></a>4.2 Code and Releases</h3> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <div class="comment"> | 
|  | <p>The  <a href="<?= $previous ?>#4_2_Code_and_Releases">previous version</a> of this | 
|  | document restricted code ownership to the former notion of "Operating" projects. With | 
|  | the generalization of projects, it is now possible for a project at any level in the hierarchy | 
|  | to have (or not have) code.</p> | 
|  | <p>This version of the document clarifies that a project in the incubation phase may | 
|  | make pre-1.0 releases only.</p></div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>Each Project owns and maintains a collection of resources.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>Resources may include source code, a project website, space on the downloads server, | 
|  | access to build resources, and other services provided by the Eclipse Foundation infrastructure. | 
|  | The exact infrastructure provided by the Eclipse Foundation varies over time | 
|  | and is defined outside this process document.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>A project is not strictly required to make use of all the resources made available; a project might, | 
|  | for example, opt to <em>not</em> maintain a source code repository. Such a Project might operate as an | 
|  | organizational unit, or container, for several Sub-Projects. Similarly, a Project might opt to | 
|  | provide a consolidated website, build and/or download site for its Sub-Projects (the Sub-Projects would then | 
|  | not require those resources for themselves).</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>Each Project has a single Bugzilla component for its bugs. </p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Any Project in the Mature Phase may make a <b>Release</b>. | 
|  | A Project in the Incubation Phase with two Mentors may make a pre-1.0 <b>Release</b>. | 
|  | A Release may include the code from any subset of the Project's descendants. </p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="4_3_IP_Records"></a>4.3 IP Records</h3> | 
|  | <p>A Project at any level may receive IP clearance for contributions and third-party libraries. | 
|  | IP approval will often include the same approval for all descendant Projects. | 
|  | However, IP clearance will only be granted at the most appropriate technical | 
|  | level. </p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="4_4_Community_Awareness"></a>4.4 Community Awareness</h3> | 
|  | <p>Projects are the level of communication with the larger Eclipse community and ecosystem. | 
|  | Projects may either have their own communications (website, mailing lists, forums/newsgroups, etc) | 
|  | or they may be part of a parent Project's communications (website, mailing list, forums/newsgroups, etc). | 
|  | In either case, the Project is required to maintain an open and public communication channel with | 
|  | the Eclipse community including, but not limited to, project plans, schedules, design discussions, and so on.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | All Projects must make the communication channels easy to find. Projects are further required to | 
|  | make the separate communication channels of their child Projects (if any) easy to find.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Any Project in the Incubation Phase must correctly identify its website and Releases. | 
|  | A Project with at least one descendant Project in Incubation Phase must correctly annotate | 
|  | its own website so as to notify the Eclipse community that incubating Projects exist in its hierarchy. | 
|  | Any Release containing code from an Incubation Phase project must be correctly labeled, | 
|  | i.e., the Incubation Phase is viral and expands to cover all Releases in which it is included. </p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="4_5_Scope"></a>4.5 Scope</h3> | 
|  | <p>Each Top-Level Project has a <b>Charter</b> which describes the purpose, <b>Scope</b>, | 
|  | and operational rules for the Top-Level Project. The Charter should refer to, and describe | 
|  | any refinements to, the provisions of this Development Process. The Board approves the | 
|  | Charter of each Top-Level Project.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Sub-Projects do not have separate Charters; Sub-Projects operate under the Charter of their parent Top-Level Project.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | All Projects have a defined <b>Scope</b> and all initiatives within 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 the termination of the Project. | 
|  | The Scope of Top-Level Projects is part of the Charter, as approved by the Board | 
|  | of Directors of the Eclipse Foundation. </p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The Scope of a Sub-Project | 
|  | is defined by the initial project proposal | 
|  | as reviewed and approved by the <b>Project Management Committee (PMC)</b> (as further | 
|  | defined below) of the Project's | 
|  | Project's top parent | 
|  | and by the EMO. A Project's Scope | 
|  | must be a subset of | 
|  | its parent's Scope.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="4_6_Leaders"></a>4.6 Leaders</h3> | 
|  | <div class="comment"> | 
|  | <p>The  <a href="<?= $previous ?>#4_6_Leaders">previous version</a> of this | 
|  | document used confusing language in an attempt to combine the discussion of | 
|  | PMCs and Project Leads. This version separates these discussions in an attempt | 
|  | to make more explicit the process of bringing leaders on board and | 
|  | the role that the two different types of leaders play. Sections 4.6.1 and 4.6.2 | 
|  | are new with this version of the document.</p> | 
|  | <p>See <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=300002">Bug 300002</a> | 
|  | and <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=300006">Bug 300006</a>.</p></div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>There are two different types of Project leadership at Eclipse: The Project | 
|  | Management Committee (PMC) and Project Leads. Both forms of leadership are required to:</p> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li>ensure that their Project is operating effectively by guiding the overall | 
|  | direction and by removing obstacles, solving problems, and resolving conflicts;</li> | 
|  | <li>operate using open source rules of engagement: meritocracy, transparency, | 
|  | and open participation; and</li> | 
|  | <li>ensure that the Project and its Sub-Projects (if any) conform to the | 
|  | Eclipse Foundation IP Policy and Procedures.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>The leadership for a Project is composed of the Project's Project Lead(s), | 
|  | the leadership of the parent Project (if any) and the PMC Leads and PMC Members | 
|  | for the Top-Level Project.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="4_6_1_PMC"></a>4.6.1 Project Management Committee (PMC)</h4> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>PMC Leads are approved by the Board; PMC members are elected by the existing PMC Leads | 
|  | and Members, and approved by the EMO(ED).</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="4_6_2_PL"></a>4.6.2 Project Lead</h4> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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's Committers and approved by the Project's PMC and the EMO(ED).</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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 the remaining Project Leads (if there are at least two other Project Leads), | 
|  | or unanimous vote of the Project's PMC.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="4_7_Committers_and_Contributors"></a>4.7 Committers and Contributors</h3> | 
|  | <div class="comment"> | 
|  | <p>The  <a href="<?= $previous ?>#4_7_Committers_and_Contributors">previous version</a> | 
|  | made specific references to the types of resources that a committer has write access | 
|  | to (code, web, and Bugzilla). In this version, the discussion of the resources has | 
|  | been generalized.</p></div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>Each Project has a <b>Development Team</b>, led by | 
|  | the Project Leaders. | 
|  | The Development Team is composed of | 
|  | <b>Committers</b> and <b>Contributors</b>. <b>Contributors</b> are individuals who contribute code, | 
|  | fixes, tests, documentation, or other work that is part of the Project. | 
|  | <b>Committers</b> 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. </p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="new-committer.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> for electing a new committer. | 
|  | </div><p>Contributors who have the trust of the Project's Committers can, through election, | 
|  | be promoted Committer for that Project. The breadth of a Committer's influence | 
|  | corresponds to the breadth of their contribution. A Development Team's Contributors | 
|  | and Committers may (and should) come from a diverse set of organizations. | 
|  | A Committer gains voting rights allowing them to affect the | 
|  | future of the Project. Becoming a Committer is a privilege that is earned by | 
|  | contributing and showing discipline and good judgment. It is a responsibility | 
|  | that should be neither given nor taken lightly, nor is it a right based on | 
|  | employment by an Eclipse Member company or any company employing existing | 
|  | committers.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The election process begins with an existing Committer on the same Project | 
|  | nominating the Contributor. The Project's Committers will vote for a period of no | 
|  | less than one week of standard business days. | 
|  | If there are at least three (3) positive votes and no negative votes within the | 
|  | voting period, the Contributor is recommended to the project's PMC | 
|  | for commit privileges. If there are three (3) or fewer Committers on the Project, | 
|  | a unanimous positive vote of all Committers is substituted. | 
|  | If the PMC approves, and the Contributor signs the appropriate Committer legal agreements | 
|  | established by the EMO (wherein, at the very least, the Developer | 
|  | agrees to abide by the Eclipse Intellectual Property Policy), the Contributor | 
|  | becomes a Committer and is given write access to the source code for that Project.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | At times, Committers may become inactive for a variety of reasons. | 
|  | The decision making process of the Project relies on active committers who respond | 
|  | to discussions and vote in a constructive and timely manner. | 
|  | The Project Leaders are responsible for ensuring the smooth operation of the Project. | 
|  | A Committer who is disruptive, does not participate actively, or has been inactive | 
|  | for an extended period may have his or her commit status revoked by the Project Leaders. | 
|  | (Unless otherwise specified, "an extended period" is defined as "no activity for more than | 
|  | six months".)</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Active participation in the user forums/newsgroups and the appropriate developer mailing lists | 
|  | is a responsibility of all Committers, and is critical to the success of the Project. | 
|  | Committers are required to monitor and contribute to the user forums/newsgroups.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Committers are required to monitor the mailing lists associated with the Project. | 
|  | This is a condition of being granted commit rights to the Project. | 
|  | It is mandatory because committers must participate in votes (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 facilitate the smooth operation of the Project. When a | 
|  | Committer is granted commit rights they will be added to the appropriate mailing lists. | 
|  | A Committer must not be unsubscribed from a developer mailing list unless their | 
|  | associated commit privileges are also revoked.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Committers are required to track, participate in, and vote on, relevant | 
|  | discussions in their associated Projects and components. There are three | 
|  | voting responses: +1 (yes), -1 (no, or veto), and 0 (abstain).</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Committers are responsible for proactively reporting problems in the bug | 
|  | tracking system, and annotating problem reports with status information, | 
|  | explanations, clarifications, or requests for more information from the | 
|  | submitter. Committers are responsible for updating problem reports when | 
|  | they have done work related to the problem.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Committer, PMC Lead, Project Lead, and Council Representative(s) are roles; | 
|  | an individual may take on more than one of these roles simultaneously.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="4_8_Councils"></a>4.8 Councils</h3> | 
|  | <p>The three Councils defined in Bylaws section VII are comprised of Strategic | 
|  | members and PMC representatives. The three Councils help guide the Projects as follows:</p><ul> | 
|  | <li>The <b>Requirements Council</b> is primarily responsible for the Eclipse Roadmap. There | 
|  | will always be more requirements than there are resources to satisfy them, thus the | 
|  | Requirements Council gathers, reviews, and categorizes all of these incoming | 
|  | requirements - from the entire Eclipse ecosystem - and proposes a coherent | 
|  | set of <b>Themes and Priorities</b>.</li> | 
|  | <li>The <b>Planning Council</b> is responsible for establishing a coordinated | 
|  | Simultaneous Release (a.k.a, "the release train") that supports the Themes | 
|  | and Priorities in the Roadmap. The Planning Council is responsible for | 
|  | cross-project planning, architectural issues, user interface conflicts, | 
|  | and all other coordination and integration issues. The Planning Council | 
|  | discharges its responsibility via collaborative evaluation, prioritization, | 
|  | and compromise.</li> | 
|  | <li><div class="postit">See <a href="architecture-council.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> for the Architecture Council. | 
|  | </div>The <b>Architecture Council</b> is responsible for the development, | 
|  | articulation, and maintenance of the Eclipse Platform Architecture and | 
|  | ensuring the Principles of the Development Process through mentorship. | 
|  | Membership in the Architecture Council is per the Bylaws through Strategic | 
|  | Membership, PMCs, and by appointment. The Architecture Council will, at | 
|  | least annually, recommend to the EMO(ED), Eclipse Members who have sufficient | 
|  | experience, wisdom, and time to be appointed to the Architecture Council and | 
|  | serve as Mentors. Election as a Mentor is a highly visible confirmation of | 
|  | the Eclipse community's respect for the candidate's technical vision, good | 
|  | judgement, software development skills, past and future contributions to | 
|  | Eclipse. It is a role that should be neither given nor taken lightly. | 
|  | Appointed members of the Architecture Council are appointed to | 
|  | two | 
|  | year renewable terms.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | <h3><a name="4_9_Incubators"></a>4.9 Incubator Projects</h3> | 
|  | <div class="comment"> | 
|  | <p>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.</p> | 
|  | <p>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 do not require mentors.</p> | 
|  | </div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>A Project may designate a Sub-Project as an "Incubator". | 
|  | An Incubator is a Project that is intended to perpetually remain in the | 
|  | <a href="#6_2_3_Incubation">Incubation</a> 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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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 standard incubation branding requirements and are subject to the IP due | 
|  | diligence rules outlined for incubating Projects. Incubators do not graduate.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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).</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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).</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>Only Top-Level Projects and Projects in the <a href="#6_2_4_Mature">Mature phase</a> may create | 
|  | an Incubator. Incubators are created via a <a href="#6_3_1_Creation_Review">Creation Review</a>. Alternatively, | 
|  | an Incubator can be created as part of a <a href="#6_3_2_Graduation_Review">Graduation</a>, | 
|  | <a href="#6_3_4_Promotion_Review">Promotion</a>, or <a href="#6_3_8_Restructuring_Review">Restructuring</a> | 
|  | Review.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h2><a name="5_Roadmap_Process"></a>5. Roadmap Process</h2> | 
|  | <div class="comment"> | 
|  | <p>This section has been modified to explicitly state that project may opt to | 
|  | aggregate their plan with that of descendant projects.</p></div> | 
|  | <p>The Roadmap describes the collective Eclipse Projects future directions and consists of two parts:</p><ol> | 
|  | <li><b>Themes and Priorities</b> from the Requirements Council</li> | 
|  | <li><b>Project Plans</b> from Projects</li> | 
|  | </ol> | 
|  | <p>The Roadmap must be consistent with the Purposes as described in Bylaws section 1.1.  It is | 
|  | developed using the prescribed <a href="/org/councils/roadmap_v2_0/index.php#process">roadmap process</a>. </p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The Roadmap is prepared by the Councils and approved by the Board annually. A proposed Roadmap | 
|  | or Roadmap update is disseminated to the Membership at Large for comment and feedback in advance | 
|  | of its adoption. This dissemination and all discussion and debate around the Roadmap must be | 
|  | held in an open and transparent public forum, such as mailing lists or newsgroups. </p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Prior to any Board vote to approve a Roadmap or Roadmap update, every Member has the right to | 
|  | communicate concerns and objections to the Board.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The process of producing or updating the Roadmap is expected to be iterative. An initial | 
|  | set of Themes and Priorities may be infeasible to implement in the desired timeframe; subsequent | 
|  | consideration may reveal new implementation alternatives or critical requirements that alter | 
|  | the team's perspective on priorities. The EMO orchestrates interaction among and within the | 
|  | Councils to drive the Roadmap to convergence.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | This Development Process, the EMO, the Councils, and the Projects all acknowledge that the | 
|  | success of the Eclipse ecosystem is dependent on a balanced set of requirements and | 
|  | implementations. A Roadmap that provides too large a burden on the Projects will be | 
|  | rejected and ignored; similarly, a Roadmap that provides no predictable Project plans | 
|  | will be unhelpful to the business and technical plans being created by the ecosystem. | 
|  | A careful balance of demands and commitments is essential to the ongoing success of the | 
|  | Eclipse Projects, frameworks, and ecosystem.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The Project Leadership is expected to ensure that their Project Plans are consistent | 
|  | with the Roadmap, and that all plans, technical documents and reports are publicly | 
|  | available. To meet this requirement, each Project is required | 
|  | to create a transparently | 
|  | available Project Plan in an EMO-defined file format | 
|  | that meets the following criteria:</p><ol> | 
|  | <li>Enumerates the areas of change in the frameworks and tools for each proposed Release</li> | 
|  | <li>Consistent with and categorized in terms of the themes and priorities of the Roadmap</li> | 
|  | <li>Identifies and accommodates cross-project dependencies</li> | 
|  | <li>Addresses requirements critical to the Ecosystem and/or the Membership at Large </li> | 
|  | <li>Advances the Project in functionality, quality, and performance</li> | 
|  | </ol> | 
|  | <p>A Project may incrementally revise their Project Plan to deliver additional tasks provided that:</p><ol> | 
|  | <li>the approved Roadmap is not put in jeopardy; and</li> | 
|  | <li>the work is consistent with the Project Plan criteria (as described above)</li> | 
|  | </ol> | 
|  | <p>A project may produce an aggregate plan for itself and its descendants. In this | 
|  | case descendents would share their ancestor's plan.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h2><a name="6_Development_Process"></a>6. Development Process</h2> | 
|  | <p>All Eclipse Projects, and hence all Project Proposals, must be consistent with the Purposes and the then-current Roadmap.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Projects must work within their Scope. Projects that desire to expand beyond their | 
|  | current Scope must seek an enlargement of their Scope using a public Review as described below.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | All projects are required to report their status at least quarterly | 
|  | using the <a href="/projects/dev_process/project-status-infrastructure.php">EMO defined status reporting procedures</a>.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Projects must provide advanced notification of upcoming features and frameworks via their Project Plan.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="6_1_Mentors"></a>6.1 Mentors</h3> | 
|  | <p>New Proposals that intend to do a Release | 
|  | are required to have at least two <b>Mentors</b>. New Proposals | 
|  | that will only Release code as part of a parent Project's Release are not required | 
|  | to have Mentors. Mentors must | 
|  | be members of the Architecture Council. The Mentors (including | 
|  | name, affiliation, and current Eclipse projects/roles) must be listed in the Proposal. | 
|  | Mentors are required to monitor and | 
|  | advise the new Project during its Incubation Phase, but are released from that | 
|  | duty | 
|  | once the Project graduates to the Mature Phase.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="6_2_Project_Lifecycle"></a>6.2 Project Lifecycle</h3> | 
|  | <img src="/projects/images/Development-process-small.gif" align="right"> | 
|  | <p>Projects go through six distinct phases. The transitions from phase to phase are open and transparent public reviews.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_2_1_Pre-Proposal"></a>6.2.1 Pre-proposal</h4> | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="pre-proposal-phase.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> about writing a proposal. | 
|  | </div><p>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. </p><ul> | 
|  | <li>The Pre-proposal phase ends when the Proposal is published by EMO and announced to the membership by the EMO.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_2_2_Proposal"></a>6.2.2 Proposal</h4> | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="proposal-phase.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> about gathering support for a proposal. | 
|  | </div><p>The proposers, in conjunction with the destination PMC and | 
|  | the community, collaborate in public to enhance, refine, and clarify | 
|  | the proposal. Mentors (if necessary) | 
|  | for the project must be identified during this phase.</p><ul> | 
|  | <li>The Proposal phase ends with a <a href="#6_3_1_Creation_Review">Creation Review</a>, or withdrawal.</li> | 
|  | <li>The Proposal may be withdrawn by the proposers.</li> | 
|  | <li>The EMO(ED) will withdraw a proposal that has been inactive for more than six months.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_2_3_Incubation"></a>6.2.3 Incubation</h4> | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="incubation-phase.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> about incubation. | 
|  | </div><p>After the project has been created, the purpose of the incubation | 
|  | phase is to establish a fully-functioning open-source project. In this context, | 
|  | incubation is about developing the process, the community, and the technology. | 
|  | Incubation is a phase rather than a place: new projects may be incubated under | 
|  | any existing Project. </p><ul> | 
|  | <li>The Incubation phase may continue with a Continuation Review or a Release Review.</li> | 
|  | <li>Top-Level Projects cannot be incubated and can only be created from one or more | 
|  | existing Mature-phase Projects.</li> | 
|  | <li>The Incubation phase ends with a Graduation Review or a Termination Review.</li> | 
|  | <li>Designated <a href="#4_9_Incubators">Incubator Projects</a> may remain perpetually | 
|  | in the Incubation phase; no reviews are required.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | <p>Many Eclipse Projects are proposed and initiated by individuals with extensive and | 
|  | successful software development experience. This document attempts to define a process | 
|  | that is sufficiently flexible to learn from all its participants. At the same time, | 
|  | however, the Incubation phase is useful for new Projects to learn the community-defined | 
|  | Eclipse-centric open source processes.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="parallel-ip-process.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> for utilizing the Parallel IP process. | 
|  | </div><p>Only projects that are properly identified as being in the incubation phase | 
|  | (including designated <a href="#4_9_Incubators">Incubator Projects</a>) may use | 
|  | the Parallel IP process to reduce IP clearance process for new contributions.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_2_4_Mature"></a>6.2.4 Mature</h4> | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="mature-phase.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> about the mature phase. | 
|  | </div><p>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 a mature member of | 
|  | the Eclipse Community. Major releases continue to go through Release Reviews.</p><ul> | 
|  | <li>Mature phase projects have Releases through Release Reviews.</li> | 
|  | <li>A Mature Project may be promoted to a Top-Level Project through a Promotion Review.</li> | 
|  | <li>A Mature Project that does not participate in a Release | 
|  | in given year may continue through a Continuation Review.</li> | 
|  | <li>Inactive Mature phase projects may be archived through a Termination Review.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_2_5_Top-Level"></a>6.2.5 Top-Level</h4> | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="top-level-phase.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> about being a top-level project. | 
|  | </div> | 
|  | <p>Projects that have demonstrated the characteristics of a Top-Level Project (e.g., | 
|  | consistent leadership in a technical area and the recruitment of a wider developer | 
|  | community) can be promoted to Top-Level Project status. This promotion occurs through | 
|  | a Promotion Review. Upon the successful completion of a Promotion Review, the EMO(ED) | 
|  | may recommend that the project be promoted to the Board of Directors and ask that its | 
|  | Charter be reviewed and approved.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_2_6_Archived"></a>6.2.6 Archived</h4> | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="archived-phase.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> for archiving projects. | 
|  | </div><p>Projects that become inactive, either through dwindling resources or by reaching their natural | 
|  | conclusion, are archived. Projects can reach 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 major frameworks. Projects are moved to Archived status through a Termination Review. </p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | If there is sufficient community interest in reactivating an Archived Project, the Project | 
|  | will start again with Creation Review. As there must be good reasons to have moved a | 
|  | Project to the Archives, the Creation Review provides a sufficiently high bar to prove that those | 
|  | reasons are no longer valid.  It also ensures that the original or updated project goals | 
|  | are still consistent with the Purposes and Roadmap.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="6_3_Reviews"></a>6.3 Reviews</h3> | 
|  | <div class="comment"> | 
|  | <p>This iteration of the document removes the notion of a "review call" in | 
|  | favour of a "review period" during which the community is given an opportunity | 
|  | to comment. This acknowledges the reality that the optional review calls | 
|  | required by the <a href="<?= $previous ?>#6_3_Reviews">previous version</a> of this document | 
|  | <em>never</em> actually occurred. Given that there will be no review calls, references to | 
|  | "slides" have been removed.</p> | 
|  | <p>See <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=304878">Bug 304878</a>.</p> | 
|  | </div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | All Projects are required to participate in | 
|  | at least one Review per year.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | For each <b>Review</b>, the project leadership makes a presentation to, and | 
|  | receives feedback from, the Eclipse membership. </p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | A Review is a fairly comprehensive process. Gathering the material for a Review and | 
|  | preparing the presentation is a non-trivial effort, but the introspection offered by | 
|  | this exercise is useful for the Project and results are very useful for the entire | 
|  | Eclipse community. In addition, Reviews have a specific relationship to the requirements | 
|  | of the <a href="/org/documents/Eclipse_IP_Policy.pdf">Eclipse IP Policy</a>.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | All Reviews have the same general process:</p> | 
|  | <ol> | 
|  | <li>Projects are responsible for initiating the appropriate reviews. 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.</li> | 
|  | <li> A Review then continues with the Project's Leadership requesting that the EMO(ED) schedule the Review. </li> | 
|  | <li> Prior to the start of the review period, the Project leadership provides the EMO with | 
|  | review documentation. <ul> | 
|  | <li> The review documentation material always includes a document that describes the review. The minimum | 
|  | contents of the document are specified by the individual Review types.</li> | 
|  | <li> The presentation material must be available in a format that anyone in the Eclipse | 
|  | membership can review. For example, Microsoft Powerpoint files are not an acceptable | 
|  | single format: such files may be one of the formats, but not the only format. Similarly | 
|  | for Apple Keynote files and Microsoft Word files. PDF and HTML are acceptable single formats.</li> | 
|  | <li> The presentation material must have a correct copyright statement | 
|  | and license.</li> | 
|  | <li> The presentation material must be <em>archival quality</em>. This means that the materials | 
|  | must be comprehensible and complete on their own without requiring explanation by a human | 
|  | presenter, reference to a wiki, or to other non-archived | 
|  | web pages.</li> | 
|  | </ul></li> | 
|  | <li> The EMO announces the Review schedule and makes the documentation available to the membership-at-large.</li> | 
|  | </ol> | 
|  | <p>The criteria for the successful completion of each type of Review will be documented | 
|  | in writing by the EMO in guidelines made available via the www.eclipse.org website. | 
|  | Such guidelines will include, but are not limited to the following:</p><ol> | 
|  | <li> Clear evidence that the project has vibrant committer, adopter and user communities | 
|  | as appropriate for the type of Review.</li> | 
|  | <li> Reasonable diversity in its committer population as appropriate for the type of | 
|  | Review. Diversity status must be provided not only as number of people/companies, but | 
|  | also in terms of effort provided by those people/companies. </li> | 
|  | <li> Documented completion of all required due diligence under | 
|  | the <a href="/org/documents/Eclipse_IP_Policy.pdf">Eclipse IP Policy</a>.</li> | 
|  | <li> For Continuation, Graduation and Release Reviews, the project | 
|  | must have a current project plan, in the format specified by the EMO, available to the community.</li> | 
|  | <li> Balanced progress in creating both frameworks and extensible, exemplary tools.</li> | 
|  | <li> Showcase the project's quality through project-team chosen metrics and | 
|  | measures, e.g., coupling, cyclomatic complexity, test/code coverage, | 
|  | documentation of extensions points, etc.</li> | 
|  | </ol> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The Review period is open for no less than one week and usually no more than | 
|  | two weeks of generally accepted business days.</p> | 
|  | <ol> | 
|  | <li> The Review begins with | 
|  | the EMO's posting of the review materials at the start of the Review period</li> | 
|  | <li> | 
|  | The proper functioning of the Eclipse Development Process is contingent on | 
|  | the active participation of the Eclipse Members and Committers, especially in Reviews, | 
|  | thus each Review has an EMO-designated discussion and feedback | 
|  | communication channel: a forum/newgroup, a mailing list, or some other public forum.</li> | 
|  | <li>If a Committer election is required for a Review (for example, for a <a href="#6_3_1_Creation_Review">Creation Review</a>), then it | 
|  | is held simultaneously with the Review period. Thus the election and the Review will end at | 
|  | the same time, allowing quick and efficient provisioning of the resulting Project.</li> | 
|  | <li> The EMO(ED) approves or fails the Review based on the public comments, | 
|  | the scope of the Project, and the Purposes of the Eclipse Foundation as | 
|  | defined in the Bylaws. </li> | 
|  | <li>The Review ends with the announcement of the results | 
|  | in the defined Review communication channel (the EMO(ED) will request that the Project Lead make this announcement).</li> | 
|  | </ol> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | If any Member believes that the EMO has acted incorrectly in approving or | 
|  | failing a Review may appeal to the Board to review the EMO's decision.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_3_1_Creation_Review"></a>6.3.1 Creation Review</h4> | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="creation-review.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> about Creation Reviews. | 
|  | </div><p>The purpose of the Creation Review is to assess the community and membership | 
|  | response to the proposal, to verify that appropriate resources are available | 
|  | for the project to achieve its plan, and to serve as a committer election for | 
|  | the project's initial Committers. The Eclipse Foundation strives not to be a | 
|  | repository of "code dumps" and thus projects must be sufficiently staffed for forward progress. </p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | The Creation Review documents must include | 
|  | short nomination bios of the proposed initial committers. | 
|  | These bios should discuss | 
|  | their relationship to, and history with, the incoming code | 
|  | and/or their involvement with the area/technologies covered by the proposal. | 
|  | The goal is to help keep any legacy contributors connected to new project and | 
|  | explain that connection to the current and future Eclipse membership, as well | 
|  | as justify the initial Committers' participation in a meritocracy.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_3_2_Graduation_Review"></a>6.3.2 Graduation Review</h4> | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="graduation-review.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> about Graduation Reviews. | 
|  | </div><p>The purpose of the Graduation Review is to confirm that the Project is/has:</p><ul> | 
|  | <li> a working and demonstrable code base of sufficiently high quality</li> | 
|  | <li> active and sufficiently diverse communities appropriate to the size of the graduating code base: adopters, developers, and users</li> | 
|  | <li> operating fully in the open following the Principles and Purposes of Eclipse</li> | 
|  | <li> a credit to Eclipse and is functioning well within the larger Eclipse community</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | <p>The Graduation Review is about the phase change from Incubation Phase to | 
|  | Mature Phase. If the Project and/or some of its code is simultaneously relocating to another Project, | 
|  | the Graduation Review will be combined with a <a href="#6_3_8_Restructuring_Review">Restructuring Review</a>. </p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_3_3_Release_Review"></a>6.3.3 Release Review</h4> | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="release-review.php">guidelines and | 
|  | checklists</a> about Release Reviews. | 
|  | </div><p>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 remaining quality and/or architectural issues, and to verify that the | 
|  | project is continuing to operate according to the Principles and Purposes of Eclipse.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_3_4_Promotion_Review"></a>6.3.4 Promotion Review</h4> | 
|  | <p>The purpose of a Promotion Review is to determine if the Project has demonstrated | 
|  | the characteristics of a Top-Level Project, e.g., consistent leadership in a | 
|  | technical area and the recruitment of a wider developer community. The Project | 
|  | will already be a well-functioning Mature Eclipse Project, so evidence to the | 
|  | contrary will be a negative for promotion. Top-Level Projects, both through their | 
|  | existence and their Council memberships, have substantial influence over direction | 
|  | and operation of Eclipse, thus it behooves the membership to grant Top-Level status | 
|  | only for merit: for demonstrated service to the larger Eclipse ecosystem.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_3_5_Continuation_Review"></a>6.3.5 Continuation Review</h4> | 
|  | <p>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 team will | 
|  | be expected to explain the recent technical progress and to demonstrate sufficient | 
|  | adopter, developer, and user support for the Project. The goal of the Continuation | 
|  | Review is to avoid having inactive projects looking promising but never actually | 
|  | delivering extensible frameworks and exemplary tools to the ecosystem.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_3_6_Termination_Review"></a>6.3.6 Termination Review</h4> | 
|  | <div class="postit">See <a href="http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/HOWTO/Review_Information_for_Project_Leads#Termination_.28Archive.29_Reviews">Termination Review "How To"</a> for more information. | 
|  | </div> | 
|  | <p>The purpose of a Termination Review is to provide a final opportunity for the | 
|  | Committers and/or Eclipse membership to discuss the proposed withdrawal 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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_3_7_Move_Review"></a>6.3.7 Move Review</h4> | 
|  | <p>A Move Review is considered to be a special type of | 
|  | <a href="#6_3_8_Restructuring_Review">Restructuring Review</a>.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_3_8_Restructuring_Review"></a>6.3.8 Restructuring Review</h4> | 
|  | <div class="comment"> | 
|  | <p>This iteration of the document provides more detail on Restructuring Reviews. It | 
|  | also considers a Move Review (as defined by the <a href="<?= $previous ?>#6_3_7_Move_Review">previous version</a> | 
|  | of this document) to be a special type of a Restructuring Review.</p> | 
|  | <p>This version of the document makes explicit a loophole that permits | 
|  | the creation of new projects without engaging in the full proposal/creation | 
|  | process. This applies only to new project with a scope that is a subset | 
|  | of the original project's scope. There is no explicit requirement that a | 
|  | project become a parent to the new projects. New projects can be created as | 
|  | siblings or elsewhere in the project hierarchy. In the event that a restructuring | 
|  | review results in unrelated projects, it is expected that the scope of the original project will be | 
|  | adjusted accordingly.</p> | 
|  | </div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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:</p> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li>Movement of significant chunks of functionality from one project to another;</li> | 
|  | <li>Modification of the project structure, e.g. combining multiple projects into a single project, or | 
|  | decomposing a single project into multiple projects; and/or</li> | 
|  | <li>Change of project scope.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | <p>A Restructuring Review may include the movement of significant chunks of code. | 
|  | A move is considered significant if it has an impact on 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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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>.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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 committers 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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>This may include:</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li>Name, description, scope, and committer lists of new projects that need to be created;</li> | 
|  | <li>Source and target locations for moves of source code directories;</li> | 
|  | <li>Reorganization of builds and downloads;</li> | 
|  | <li>Contribution questionnaires (CQs) that need to be moved or piggy-back CQs that must be created;</li> | 
|  | <li>Location of the approved IP Log; and</li> | 
|  | <li>Other information that helps the community understand the change.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h4><a name="6_3_9_Combining_Reviews"></a>6.3.9 Combining Reviews</h4> | 
|  | <div class="comment"> | 
|  | <p>This section has been modified to explicitly allow multiple projects to | 
|  | participate in a single. It is possible, for example, for a project and its | 
|  | descendants to engage in a simultaneous Release Review.</p></div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <p>It should be noted that the purpose of combining reviews is to better serve the community, | 
|  | rather than to reduce effort on the part of 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.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="6_4_Releases"></a>6.4 Releases</h3> | 
|  | <p><em>(Most of this section is borrowed and paraphrased from the excellent | 
|  | <a href="http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html">Apache Software | 
|  | Foundation Releases FAQ</a>. The Eclipse community has many of the same | 
|  | beliefs about Releases as does the Apache community and their words were already excellent. | 
|  | The Apache Software Foundation Releases FAQ is distributed under the | 
|  | <a href="http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0">Apache License, Version 2.0</a>.)</em></p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Releases are, by definition, anything that is distributed outside of the Committers | 
|  | of a Project. If users are being directed to download a build, then | 
|  | that build has been released (modulo the exceptions below). All Projects | 
|  | and Committers must obey the Eclipse Foundation requirements on approving any release.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | <em>(Exception 1: nightly and integration builds)</em> | 
|  | During the process of developing software and preparing a Release, various | 
|  | nightly and integration builds | 
|  | are made available to the developer community for testing purposes. Do not include | 
|  | any links on the project website, blogs, wikis, etc. that might | 
|  | encourage non-early-adopters to download | 
|  | and use nightly builds, release candidates, or any other similar package (links | 
|  | aimed at early-adopters and the project's developers are both permitted and encouraged). The | 
|  | only people who are supposed to know about such packages are the people following | 
|  | the developer mailing list and thus are aware of the limitations of such builds.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | <em>(Exception 2: milestone and release candidate builds)</em> | 
|  | Projects are encouraged to use an agile development process including regular milestones | 
|  | (for example, six week milestones). Milestones and release candidates are "almost releases" intended for | 
|  | adoption and testing by early adopters. Projects are allowed to have links | 
|  | on the project website, blogs, wikis, etc. to encourage these outside-the-committer-circle | 
|  | early adopters to download and test the milestones and release candidates, but such communications must | 
|  | include caveats explaining that these are not official Releases.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li>Milestones are to be labeled <code>x.yMz</code>, e.g., 2.3M1 (milestone 1 towards version 2.3), 2.3M2 (milestone 2 towards version 2.3), etc.</li> | 
|  | <li>Release candidates are to be labeled <code>x.yRCz</code>, e.g., 2.3RC1 (release candidate 1 towards version 2.3).</li> | 
|  | <li>Official Releases are the only downloads allowed to be labeled with <code>x.y</code>, e.g., 0.5, 1.0, 2.3, etc.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | All official Releases must have a successful <a href="#6_3_3_Release_Review">Release Review</a> before being made available for download. </p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | <em>(Exception 3: bug fix releases with no new features)</em> | 
|  | Bug 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 Review. | 
|  | If a bug fix release contains new features, then the Project must | 
|  | have a full Release Review.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Under no circumstances are builds and milestones to be used as a substitute for doing | 
|  | proper official Releases. Proper Release management and reviews is a key aspect of | 
|  | Eclipse Quality. </p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h3><a name="6_5_Grievance_Handling"></a>6.5 Grievance Handling</h3> | 
|  | <p>When a Member has a concern about a Project, the Member will raise | 
|  | that concern with the Project's Leadership. If the Member is not | 
|  | satisfied with the result, the Member can raise the concern with | 
|  | the parent Project's Leadership. The Member can continue appeals | 
|  | up the Project Leadership Chain and, if still not satisfied, thence | 
|  | to the EMO, then the Executive Director, and finally to the Board. | 
|  | All appeals and discussions will abide by the Guiding Principles of | 
|  | being open, transparent, and public.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Member concerns may include:</p><ul> | 
|  | <li><b>Out of Scope.</b> It is alleged that a Project is | 
|  | exceeding its approved scope.</li> | 
|  | <li><b>Inconsistent with Purposes.</b> It is alleged that a Project | 
|  | is inconsistent with the Roadmap and/or Purposes.</li> | 
|  | <li><b>Dysfunctional.</b> It is alleged that a Project is not | 
|  | functioning correctly or is in violation of one or more requirements | 
|  | of the Development Process.</li> | 
|  | <li><b>Contributor Appeal.</b> It is alleged that a Contributor who | 
|  | desires to be a Committer is not being treated fairly.</li> | 
|  | <li><b>Invalid Veto.</b> It is alleged that a -1 vote on a Review is | 
|  | not in the interests of the Project and/or of Eclipse.</li> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | <p>A variety of grievance resolutions are available to the EMO up to, and | 
|  | including, rebooting or restarting a project with new Committers and leadership.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h2><a name="7_Precedence"></a>7. Precedence</h2> | 
|  | <p>In the event of a conflict between this document and a Board-approved | 
|  | project charter, the most recently approved document will take precedence.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <h2><a name="8_Revisions"></a>8. Revisions</h2> | 
|  | <p>As specified in the Bylaws, the EMO is responsible for maintaining | 
|  | this document and all changes must be approved by the Board.</p> | 
|  | <p> | 
|  | Due to the continued evolution of the Eclipse technology, the Eclipse | 
|  | community, and the software marketplace, it is expected that the Development | 
|  | Process (this document) will be reviewed and revised on at least an | 
|  | annual basis. The timeline for that review should be chosen so as to | 
|  | incorporate the lessons of the previous annual coordinate release and | 
|  | to be applied to the next annual coordinated release. | 
|  | </p><p> | 
|  | The EMO is further responsible for ensuring that all plans, documents | 
|  | and reports produced in accordance with this Development Process be | 
|  | made available to the Membership at Large via an appropriate mechanism | 
|  | in a timely, effective manner. | 
|  |  | 
|  | </p><h4><a name="8_1_Revision"></a>8.1 Revision 2.5</h4> | 
|  | <p>This document was approved by the Eclipse Foundation Board of Directors in its meeting | 
|  | on May 19/2010. It takes effect (replacing all previous versions) on August 1/2010.</p> | 
|  |  | 
|  | </div><!-- midcolumn --> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <div id="rightcolumn"> | 
|  | <div class="sideitem"> | 
|  | <h6>See also</h6> | 
|  | <ul> | 
|  | <li><a href="development_process_2010.pdf">PDF version of this document</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="<?= $previous ?>">Previous edition of this document</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="<?= $next ?>">Next edition of this document</a></li> | 
|  | <li><a href="<?= $diff ?>">Changes made since the previous version of this document</a></li> | 
|  | <?= $commentary ? '' : '<li><a href="?commentary">This document with comments</a></li>' ?> | 
|  | </ul> | 
|  | </div> | 
|  | </div> | 
|  |  | 
|  | </div><!-- maincontent --> | 
|  |  | 
|  | <?php | 
|  | # Paste your HTML content between the EOHTML markers! | 
|  | $html = ob_get_contents(); | 
|  | ob_end_clean(); | 
|  |  | 
|  | # Generate the web page | 
|  | $App->generatePage($theme, $Menu, $Nav, $pageAuthor, $pageKeywords, $pageTitle, $html); | 
|  | ?> |