activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.com>
Subject Re: Artemis with License Checks on PR/s build
Date Wed, 06 May 2015 14:26:36 GMT
To be clear, those issues weren't caught because the license check was disabled even on the
PR build.  If that was enabled we would have caught the issues before the code was merged.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Clebert Suconic" <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
To: dev@activemq.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2015 9:22:32 AM
Subject: Re: Artemis with License Checks on PR/s build

As it has happened.. we had a few issues on the github already that we
needed to fix.

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Clebert Suconic
<clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's the kind of thing that won't happen.. people will just ignore it
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Andy Taylor <andy.tayls67@gmail.com> wrote:
>> or document how to enable it so users can turn it on if they want
>>
>>
>> On 06/05/15 15:16, Clebert Suconic wrote:
>>>
>>> The thing is.. we will have more failures on the PR builds.. .I would
>>> rather have people getting issues at their code.
>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps you could just document how to disable on README.. and make it
>>> easy for users to disable it.
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Andy Taylor <andy.tayls67@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Personally I prefer it just to be run on PR's, not everyone that build
>>>> from
>>>> source is bothered about it. I think users should be able to build from
>>>> source no matter what they have in their source tree, log files, users
>>>> own
>>>> source etc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 06/05/15 14:54, Clebert Suconic wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, the poms now have the RAT check enabled. That means we would get
>>>>> our own mistakes instead of wasting server's time resource with a
>>>>> failed PR.
>>>>> I think that's the right way to do it... we wouldn't waste server's
>>>>> time resource on failed PRs... and wouldn't waste anyone's time on
>>>>> looking at PRs for that kind of error.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I'm strongly in favor on keeping the check on on the builds.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there anyone with a different opinion on this.. and on that case,,
>>>>> why?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 7:57 PM, Clebert Suconic
>>>>> <clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just a heads up,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Justin Bertram has enabled license checks on the build again, and
the
>>>>>> PR checks...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, from now on committing java files without headers won't get un
>>>>>> noticed without a build failure ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com



-- 
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com

Mime
View raw message