Bug 564264 - Update to javax.annotation 1.3.5
Summary: Update to javax.annotation 1.3.5
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: Releng (show other bugs)
Version: 4.17   Edit
Hardware: PC Linux
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: 4.17 M1   Edit
Assignee: Alexander Kurtakov CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2020-06-13 02:34 EDT by Alexander Kurtakov CLA
Modified: 2020-06-21 10:34 EDT (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Alexander Kurtakov CLA 2020-06-13 02:34:54 EDT 
Available at https://download.eclipse.org/tools/orbit/downloads/drops/R20200529191137/
Comment 1 Alexander Kurtakov CLA 2020-06-13 02:35:39 EDT 
Dani, should we still file PB CQs after the last Architecture council meeting?
Comment 2 Eclipse Genie CLA 2020-06-15 09:24:05 EDT 
New Gerrit change created: https://git.eclipse.org/r/164916
Comment 3 Dani Megert CLA 2020-06-15 10:46:45 EDT 
(In reply to Alexander Kurtakov from comment #1)
> Dani, should we still file PB CQs after the last Architecture council
> meeting?
We had this action item for you:
Alex: Alex to test and validate with Wayne https://blogs.eclipse.org/post/wayne-beaton/revising-eclipse-ip-due-diligence-process-third-party-content

Personally I'd say "no", but we i.e. you should clarify this once for all.
Comment 4 Alexander Kurtakov CLA 2020-06-15 10:54:19 EDT 
Wayne, would you please state here that PB CQs are not needed so we have it written.
Comment 5 Wayne Beaton CLA 2020-06-15 13:31:13 EDT 
Piggyback CQs are not required.
Comment 6 Eclipse Genie CLA 2020-06-16 00:29:05 EDT 
New Gerrit change created: https://git.eclipse.org/r/164953